N18 Do pets activate twice with overseer?

[TopsyKretts]

Yes, only the target fighter of Overseer gets 2 actions. Not the pets.

The pets activate when the owner activates. Overseer gives the fighter 2 actions, not an activation.

 

[Beebopalulla]

Well at least I agree it's a clumsy wording. Good point with the psycker that prevent activation.

 

[Bargadasch]

In our Campain we agreed that the Pets my also be activated because of this addition: "...as though it were their turn to activate..."
But I agree, it is not realy clear and should be clarified, so we made a clarification for our campain.

 

[Xisor_of_Karak_Izor]

If a fighter "Starts their day as though it were morning"... do they eat breakfast? Do they have gunk coffee? Do they open their sump curtains?

This is a really weird retroactive- hangover from 40k lingo, or a self-doubt that's crept in from somewhere, but I think it shames all of you to engage in it. <Theatrical finger-wagging goes here.>

Sorry, you should feel as though it shames you.

(Dramatic language, but this has been bubbling away as an irritant for me for a long time. It's a deception, a masquerade, an impersonation: but a successful and deliberate one. That's what as though means here, sure!? I might not be activating, but I still do the activation stuff. It's abundantly a shorthand for "activate, but don't you try to legalese your way into another unholy advantage! ". And I don't think Pets are the route to an unholy advantage.)

...

(I could be wrong. But if they mean what you're all saying, "as though" is a terrible way to phrase it. It's not like "if and only if" or "up to but not exceeding", heck it's closer to literarily evoking that you're doing an activation in all but name - and not trying to be technically subtle to indicate that you're sidestepping the triggerpoint for Pets.

[Although, if they did mean that, then it's still a bad way to phrase it. I guess this is the hole I'll die in!])

 

[Beebopalulla]

If a fighter "Starts their day as if it were morning"... do they eat breakfast? Do they have coffee?

This is a really weird retroactive- hangover from 40k lingo, or a self-doubt that's crept in from somewhere, but I think it shames all of you to engage in it.

Sorry, you should feel as if it shames you.

(Dramatic language, but this has been bubbling away as an irritant for me for a long time. It's a deception, a masquerade, an impersonation: but a successful and deliberate one. That's what as if means here, sure!? I might not be activating, but I still do the activation stuff. It's abundantly a shorthand for "activate, but don't you try to legalese your way into another unholy advantage! ". And I don't think Pets are the route to an unholy advantage.)

...

(I could be wrong. But if they mean what you're all saying, "as if" is a terrible way to phrase it. It's not like "if and only if" or "up to but not exceeding", heck it's closer to literarily evoking that you're doing an activation in all but name - and not trying to be technically subtle to indicate that you're sidestepping the triggerpoint for Pets.

[If they did mean that, then it's still a bad way to phrase it. I guess this is the hole I'll die in!])

Quoi? comment? pourquoi?

You lost me there !

 

[Xisor_of_Karak_Izor]

(Edited for marginally more clarity, but also to fix that I misquoted the whole thing as "as if" rather than "as though".)

 

[DoomMerchant]

If a fighter "Starts their day as though it were morning"... do they eat breakfast? Do they have gunk coffee? Do they open their sump curtains?

This is a really weird retroactive- hangover from 40k lingo, or a self-doubt that's crept in from somewhere, but I think it shames all of you to engage in it. <Theatrical finger-wagging goes here.>

Sorry, you should feel as though it shames you.

(Dramatic language, but this has been bubbling away as an irritant for me for a long time. It's a deception, a masquerade, an impersonation: but a successful and deliberate one. That's what as though means here, sure!? I might not be activating, but I still do the activation stuff. It's abundantly a shorthand for "activate, but don't you try to legalese your way into another unholy advantage! ". And I don't think Pets are the route to an unholy advantage.)

...

(I could be wrong. But if they mean what you're all saying, "as though" is a terrible way to phrase it. It's not like "if and only if" or "up to but not exceeding", heck it's closer to literarily evoking that you're doing an activation in all but name - and not trying to be technically subtle to indicate that you're sidestepping the triggerpoint for Pets.

[Although, if they did mean that, then it's still a bad way to phrase it. I guess this is the hole I'll die in!])

I like the drama of this. Am inclined to prefer that pets activate because it seems more straight forward but looking at the legal advice think its likely not the case that they do activate twice alas.