Do Horrors Split when they flee?

[Ganigumo]

As title. I'm constantly butting heads with people that say they do split when they flee, and unfortunately GW has not issued any commentary on it.

Now for the rules: 

Horrors split when they are slain.

Fleeing:  You decide which of 
the models from your units flee – 
remove them from play and count 
them as having been slain.

 

As I see it they shouldn't split because models that flee are never actually slain, only removed from play. The statement "count them as having been slain" is both past tense, and the "count them" part is a qualifier used as a substitution for something, in this case they needed to be counted as slain because they weren't actually slain.

[jamie.white]

They don’t split when removed by battle shock . They aren’t slain , they count as slain . 

[TheCovenLord]

By the very wording it is not split. They are only counted as slain for removal purposes. They are not actually slain per the wording of the rule.

 

 

RAI vs RAW the very idea is ridiculous. They are running away not splitting to become more brave and stay and fight. The people you play with play in bad faith.

 

 

EDIT: Not to say AoS rules aren't riddled with contradictions and silly RAI vs RAW moments but this is RAW and RAI agreeing and them splitting from fleeing is not how the rule works.

Edited March 22, 2021 by TheCovenLord

[NinthMusketeer]

On 3/22/2021 at 6:39 AM, jamie.white said:

They don’t split when removed by battle shock . They aren’t slain , they count as slain . 

This is correct. To elaborate; they split when they are slain (present tense) whereas battleshock removes the models and then says to treat them as having been slain (past tense) as in 'now that they are gone treat them as if they had died normally even though they did not.' The tricky part of the rule comes in the present and past tense of "slain" being the same word.

Sometimes a good question to ask oneself is 'if I was building a list for a tournament would I count on the rule working this way when I got there?'

Edited March 24, 2021 by NinthMusketeer

[Ganigumo]

1 minute ago, TheCovenLord said:

They really should just say "models that flee are removed from play" and it would resolve this. No use of the word "slain" to confuse the issue. GW is notorious for murky language though

It does serve a purpose though, for stuff like restoring slain models/units and tiebreakers in some battleplans (counting up the points of slain models).

[NinthMusketeer]

No, I am relatively certain that is not the case here. These people are making an honestly effort to play by the rules.

[AlexScipio]

37 minutes ago, Marcvs said:

nice reductio ad absurdum you got there, I will be sure to mention this next time I have this conversation, at least it will add to the fun

i know the result i suggests it's absurd, obviusly, its a foolishness. but it is because flee and slain is not the same thing. Rules doesnt say "models that flee are slain", but "models that flee are removed from play and counted as have been slain". If GW wanted slain and flee were the same they had wrote that in other way, but if the wording is diferent so that should mean something, because of language economy.

But if we play assuming flee and slain are the same for some rules, it must be for all rules and when we see "slain" it means "slain and flee" because flee count as slain with no condition, including battleshock phase, because of RAW my reductio ad absurdum is true, rules doesnt say "slain models before the roll is made", says "slain models in that turn" and battleshock phase is part of the turn. And if horrors split when they flee they must be counted in the battleshock test you've done in the same way you can use petrifex command hability after saves rolls are made but before determinig the damage. Rules doesnt says you cant add a modifier to a dice roll after made it.

Edited March 23, 2021 by AlexScipio

[willange]

Honestly this is the first time I'm ever hearing that horrors wouldn't split during battleshock.  We've always played that way and no one's ever thought anything of it.  Huh.  Our local Tzeentch player hasn't ever really dominated specifically because of horrors though.

[Ganigumo]

31 minutes ago, Beer & Pretzels Gamer said:

As the son of an English teacher, the husband of an English major, and friend of a librarian @AlexScipio I feel for you.  

Unfortunately, the English language is a beautifully imprecise one and GW seems to lean into that imprecision.  Above I have clipped the key sentence and the key word to me regarding the ambiguity, as the word “and” can and frequently is used to state simultaneous actions.  When people sing and dance, they are doing both at the same time.  If my driving instructor paraphrases Jim Morrison and tells me to keep my eyes on the road and my hands upon the wheel, they are expecting me to do both at the same time.

There is a simple substitute in the English language when referencing actions to clearly imply order.  It is “then.”  If GW clearly wanted the counting as slain to come AFTER the removed from play, they should’ve used then.  No need for a FAQ in that case.

But by using “and,” GW has made it easy for players, in complete good faith, to interpret those two actions as occurring simultaneously.  Again, this is a very common (arguably with actions the more common) interpretation of the word “and” given the simple substitute of “then” when an order of operation needs to be stated.

"Count as" usually refers to a subsitution of some sort. You don't need to "Count something as" if it actually happened. Horrors don't split when they are counted as slain, they split when they are slain.

Also everyone in this thread should send an email to "AoSFAQ@gwplc.com" regarding this, so they actually address it in an FAQ.

[Marcvs]

12 minutes ago, Kasper said:

If it looks like a duck, swims like a duck, and quacks like a duck, then it probably is a duck. 

 

nope.

Here the thing doesn't look like a duck at all, but the rules tell you that it counts as being a duck. Does this mean that the thing now also swims and quacks?

[Marcvs]

I would really like to see an official FAQ on this point. I agree with the interpretation of the other comments (if you must add that they "count as slain", by definition it means that they were not "slain" in the first place) but the "official unofficial" FAQ where I play says the opposite (since they "count as slain" they split)

[Ganigumo]

2 minutes ago, Marcvs said:

I would really like to see an official FAQ on this point. I agree with the interpretation of the other comments (if you must add that they "count as slain", by definition it means that they were not "slain" in the first place) but the "official unofficial" FAQ where I play says the opposite (since they "count as slain" they split)

 

19 minutes ago, TheCovenLord said:

RAI vs RAW the very idea is ridiculous. They are running away not splitting to become more brave and stay and fight. The people you play with play in bad faith.

Yeah I've been seeing a lot of people insisting that because they "count as slain" they split, it seems like a pretty disingenuous reading of the rules to me and the entire passage makes no sense if you assume they "are slain", it would just read "those models are slain".

I'm curious if its possibly a language barrier thing, maybe its not as clear if you don't speak english as your first language?

[TheCovenLord]

2 minutes ago, Ganigumo said:

 

Yeah I've been seeing a lot of people insisting that because they "count as slain" they split, it seems like a pretty disingenuous reading of the rules to me and the entire passage makes no sense if you assume they "are slain", it would just read "those models are slain".

I'm curious if its possibly a language barrier thing, maybe its not as clear if you don't speak english as your first language?

They really should just say "models that flee are removed from play" and it would resolve this. No use of the word "slain" to confuse the issue. GW is notorious for murky language though

Edited March 22, 2021 by TheCovenLord

[TheCovenLord]

6 minutes ago, Ganigumo said:

It does serve a purpose though, for stuff like restoring slain models/units and tiebreakers in some battleplans (counting up the points of slain models).

Fair point. Goes to show rule writing isn't as easy as we would all like it to be. I do stand by that there should be an easier way to convey the information without leaving it open enough for players to abuse (such as in this case).

 

[Marcvs]

58 minutes ago, jamie.white said:

Lots of Tzeench players where you play lol . 
 

I mean it’s the most foul abuse of raw vs rai lol. 

to be fair, we are in a deeply non-English speaking country and the formulation of that battleshock rule is confusing

[MitGas]

Personally to me they'll get removed and not replaced by blue/brimstone horrors in such a scenario.

I recently read some rules in German.... the translations are atrocious, at times downright wrong. So yeah, I'd give anyone the benefit of doubt if they use a translated battle tome.

[azdimy]

I would keep asking the gw rules team for a clarification. My local group plays it that they split when fleeing and English is the only language they know

[AlexScipio]

2 hours ago, azdimy said:

I would keep asking the gw rules team for a clarification. My local group plays it that they split when fleeing and English is the only language they know

and why do they do that? Which rule allows them to split when flee?

[azdimy]

6 minutes ago, AlexScipio said:

and why do they do that? Which rule allows them to split when flee?

From their interpretation of count as slain. Now that our local TOs have ruled it that way, this is not going to change unless an faq explicitly states otherwise 

[AlexScipio]

13 minutes ago, azdimy said:

From their interpretation of count as slain. Now that our local TOs have ruled it that way, this is not going to change unless an faq explicitly states otherwise 

so, do the horrors that flee count as slain for all effects in rules? what about battleshock tests? in a battleshock test you must add the number of models from the unit that have been slain this turn to the dice roll (not before the roll is made, the number in all the turn), so if they count as slain, horrors that flee should count to that test because they have been slain in that turn, so you should add that to the test you did (rules doesnt says that you cant add mofiers to a dice roll after doing that, petrifex command ability is the example that you can indeed do it) and if they fail the test all the unit should flee 🤔

Edited March 23, 2021 by AlexScipio

[Marcvs]

1 hour ago, AlexScipio said:

so, do the horrors that flee count as slain for all effects in rules? what about battleshock tests? in a battleshock test you must add the number of models from the unit that have been slain this turn to the dice roll (not before the roll is made, the number in all the turn), so if they count as slain, horrors that flee should count to that test because they have been slain in that turn, so you should add that to the test you did (rules doesnt says that you cant add mofiers to a dice roll after doing that, petrifex command ability is the example that you can indeed do it) and if they fail the test all the unit should flee 🤔

nice reductio ad absurdum you got there, I will be sure to mention this next time I have this conversation, at least it will add to the fun

[Ghoooouls]

1 hour ago, AlexScipio said:

so, do the horrors that flee count as slain for all effects in rules? what about battleshock tests? in a battleshock test you must add the number of models from the unit that have been slain this turn to the dice roll (not before the roll is made, the number in all the turn), so if they count as slain, horrors that flee should count to that test because they have been slain in that turn, so you should add that to the test you did (rules doesnt says that you cant add mofiers to a dice roll after doing that, petrifex command ability is the example that you can indeed do it) and if they fail the test all the unit should flee 🤔

This makes no sense, for battleshock you roll a die, add the number of models that were slain this turn and THEN the models flee and are removed, counting as slain.

You don't do a battleshock test and then do another and add the models that fled from the first battleshock test.

There's literally no way a fleeing model would then count towards battleshock, because battleshock has already happened.

Everyone I know also plays that fleeing models 'count as slain' and therefore trigger the horror ability of 'when a model is slain'. It definitely needs an FAQ as I agree the idea of it is silly.

[Ragest]

The narrative commentary implies that horrors split JUST when they die in combat, and that's the closest we have to know what the designer’s team was thinking about when the rule was wrote.

What I can't get is why Tzeentch players decided the rest must play with their rules to the point that now in every tournament is taken for granted that they do split when, at least, is a ambiguous or controversial and when you ask why is because “my to said it”, “in my community do split” and “it has been done allways like this”

Edited March 23, 2021 by Ragest

[AlexScipio]

 

49 minutes ago, Ghoooouls said:

This makes no sense, for battleshock you roll a die, add the number of models that were slain this turn and THEN the models flee and are removed, counting as slain.

You don't do a battleshock test and then do another and add the models that fled from the first battleshock test.

There's literally no way a fleeing model would then count towards battleshock, because battleshock has already happened.

Everyone I know also plays that fleeing models 'count as slain' and therefore trigger the horror ability of 'when a model is slain'. It definitely needs an FAQ as I agree the idea of it is silly.

Ok, if you want RAW you got RAW.

First of all, battleshock phase doesnt says that, not at all, it says it (if you quote a rule do it right): 

"You must make a battleshock roll for each unit that has to take a battleshock test. To make a battleshock roll, roll a dice. Add the number of models from the unit that have been slain this turn to the dice roll, and add 1 to the unit’s Bravery characteristic for every 10 models that are in the unit when the test is taken. If the modified battleshock roll is greater than the unit’s modified Bravery characteristic, the battleshock test has been failed. If the test is failed, for each point by which the modified roll exceeds the unit’s modified Bravery characteristic, one model in that unit must flee. You decide which of the models from your units flee – remove them from play and count them as having been slain"

There is no THEN anywhere. It says if the "modified roll" is bigger than the modified characteristic one model flee for each point of diference between the dice roll and the characteristic. In nowhere says the test cant be modified after rolling  it, and it says you MUST add the models that have been slain in THIS TURN to the dice roll, it do not say "slain models before de roll is made", no, it says all the slain models in THAT TURN" and battleshock phase is part of the turn. Thats the same with Petrifex Elite Comand Ability, you can use it after saves rolls are made but before determinig the damage and rend afect to the save rolls

In second place, you say the sentence has an order: first the roll and after you remove it, ok, but the same structure is in "remove from play and count them as have been slain", first you must remove from game and after that you must count them as have been slain. is it the same "break that egg and fry it" than "fry that egg and break it"? Language have some rules that the average AoS player seems to ignore, and the order of words in a sentence is also a language rule.

A logic rule, if A -> C and A=B then B ->C, its basic. So if Flee (A) = Slain (B), ALL the rules that ask for slain miniatures (ALL of them, not only the one that benefits some players) apply to Flee models, all

"But they are simultaneus", that is false, its a sequence, rules are not simultaneus, only habilites can be simultaneus because of the faqs only speak about habilities that happens at the same time, and flee is not an hability, its a rule, so the order of actions must be done in the same way they are writen, because are we talking about RAW, right? if the sentence is writing in some order why do people change that order?

Edited March 23, 2021 by AlexScipio

[Ghoooouls]

39 minutes ago, AlexScipio said:

 

Ok, if you want RAW you got RAW.

First of all, battleshock phase doesnt says that, not at all, it says it (if you quote a rule do it right): 

"You must make a battleshock roll for each unit that has to take a battleshock test. To make a battleshock roll, roll a dice. Add the number of models from the unit that have been slain this turn to the dice roll, and add 1 to the unit’s Bravery characteristic for every 10 models that are in the unit when the test is taken. If the modified battleshock roll is greater than the unit’s modified Bravery characteristic, the battleshock test has been failed. If the test is failed, for each point by which the modified roll exceeds the unit’s modified Bravery characteristic, one model in that unit must flee. You decide which of the models from your units flee – remove them from play and count them as having been slain"

There is no THEN anywhere. It says if the "modified roll" is bigger than the modified characteristic one model flee for each point of diference between the dice roll and the characteristic. In nowhere says the test cant be modified after rolling  it, and it says you MUST add the models that have been slain in THIS TURN to the dice roll, it do not say "slain models before de roll is made", no, it says all the slain models in THAT TURN" and battleshock phase is part of the turn. Thats the same with Petrifex Elite Comand Ability, you can use it after saves rolls are made but before determinig the damage and rend afect to the save rolls

In second place, you say the sentence has an order: first the roll and after you remove it, ok, but the same structure is in "remove from play and count them as have been slain", first you must remove from game and after that you must count them as have been slain. is it the same "break that egg and fry it" than "fry that egg and break it"? Language have some rules that the average AoS player seems to ignore, and the order of words in a sentence is also a language rule.

A logic rule, if A -> C and A=B then B ->C, its basic. So if Flee (A) = Slain (B), ALL the rules that ask for slain miniatures (ALL of them, not only the one that benefits some players) apply to Flee models, all

"But they are simultaneus", that is false, its a sequence, rules are not simultaneus, only habilites can be simultaneus because of the faqs only speak about habilities that happens at the same time, and flee is not an hability, its a rule, so the order of actions must be done in the same way they are writen, because are we talking about RAW, right? if the sentence is writing in some order why do people change that order?

Chill out I said I agree it's silly, but it still needs an FAQ. The rule says they are removed and count as slain - the horror rule says 'each time a model is slain' bla bla bla, so if a model counts as slain, the argument is that model counts as slain for the horrors rule.

GW has always been rubbish at rules writing.

Edited March 23, 2021 by Ghoooouls

[Ghoooouls]

27 minutes ago, AlexScipio said:

GW is not the problem, players are. Same that bastiladon save characteristic.

Been slain RAW is one thing and flee is other thing, sequence in both cases are not equal, and if we play rules as written there is no problem, they dont split. But the problem is that its only raw when it interest for cheating. I mean rules as written means rules as are truly written, doing everything in the same way that are write, in the same order as are written, and knowing that if an ability modifies a rule, any restrictions that apply to that rule still apply unless specifically noted otherwise

And if count as slain por split, count as slain for everything, not only the split part, otherwise is cheating

What happened with the basti save?