Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

 Monster Rain wrote:
He's also ignoring the fact that LotS doesn't follow other rules for shooting weapons according to the FAQ.

If the ram does damage, so too should LotS.

Who said anything about shooting weapons?

the Armor pen rules only say to add the str of the weapon to the D6 roll.

Now since it would be silly to not allow things that are not specifically weapons, like Ram's and PSA's, to roll for armor pen, we need to lump them into the "Weapon" category for the rules to work.

And since we must do that for the rules to work, they can not hit Zooming flyers, as only snap shots can hit zooming flyers, and LoTS is not a Snap Shot.

So either LoTS does not hit units. and does not work at all.

Or LOTS does hit units, and still can not hit flyers because they can not be fired as snap shots.

You're seriously just making stuff up now.

He tends to do that.

DR, your premise that somehow the inability to pen armor due to the RAW of that rule somehow validates your thought that LotS cannot hit flyers is flawed. Your assumption that you just "lump" non-weapon hits into the weapon category is also flawed.

As it stands, there is no RAW that prevents LotS from hitting zooming flyers either in the Hard to Hit rule or the subsequent FAQ. The only RAW that exists regarding LotS or any other non-weapon hits for that matter, is in regard to armor pen and even rolling to wound IIRC.

However, one has absolutely nothing to do with the other.

My rules quotes are "Made Up"?

Interesting...

The rules as written say to add the weapons strength to the D6 roll...

Via Permissive ruleset, we can not add a non weapons str to the D6 roll. unless we take a loose interpretation of weapon to mean anything that does damage to the enemy.

 DeathReaper wrote:
My rules quotes are "Made Up"?

Interesting...

The rules as written say to ass the weapons strength to the D6 roll...

Via Permissive ruleset, we can not add a non weapons str to the D6 roll. unless we take a loose interpretation of weapon to mean anything that does damage to the enemy.

Which has absolutely nothing to do with this thread. That RAW debacle is for another thread.

And if you want to use a loose interpretation with weapons regarding armor pen, I can use a strict interpretation in regard to the FAQ in that it ONLY applies to actual weapons, not loose interpretations of weapons.

And thus if we "use a strict interpretation in regard to the FAQ in that it ONLY applies to actual weapons, not loose interpretations of weapons."

Then we also have to use a strict interpretation in regards to Armor pen. and that means ONLY Weapons get to add their strength to the D6 roll to pen a vehicle.

Or we go with both as a loose interpretation and any non weapons, like the Lightning, get to add their Str to pen rolls, but that also means that the lightning can not hit a zooming flyer.

Either way Lighting does nothing to flyers.

LotS has no specific permission to hit flyers. And that should be enough since the faq is clear: only snap shots can hit a flyer.

DR is trying to say that if you try to rule lawyer that LotS should hit flyers using a "very strict RAW" argument, then he can use another "very strict RAW" argument to make LotS not damage any vehicle at all.

text removed. Don't post things like this on Dakka.
Reds8n

you have to roll a 6 to do any damage anyway.

I know a bunch of people a strung up about this considering it game breaking, but you a paying for a character who may only get to do this for one round and thats it without doing any damage... meanwhile, you have marine characters that can do reliable and threatening damage consistently on a 2+

the fact of the matter is if its wears power armor, its meant to win... leave us cron players alone, as we'll be in the same boat we were before 3 years ago where everyone had a codex stronger than ours. anything spelled "rokkit" should not be a legitimate threat... sorry

This has nothing to do with the rules of the game. When you go in a tournament you should be prepared to play by the correct rules. If you play a friendly game, do as you want.

And for the record I am a Necron player too.

there is a big difference between rules, and a bunch of geeks arguing over something based on a small twist of words that makes it convenient or inconvenient for a particular player... this, to me, is very similar to cowardice and cheating... its a game... competitive or not, you dont get to ride in the first class section on a ride to heaven, you dont get another shot at the one that got away, and you certainly dont become a freakin' super hero... Youre that guy Im going to laugh at when I death or glory your Nemesis dreadknight with a rhino, and you cry that thats not fair.

and for the record,what does that have to do with anything? most consider necrons to be over powered and will look for any excuse to raise hell in order to get something FAQ'd to make them more secure about their little plastic men lol... give me a break

 WarlordRob117 wrote:
there is a big difference between rules, and a bunch of geeks arguing over something based on a small twist of words that makes it convenient or inconvenient for a particular player... this, to me, is very similar to cowardice and cheating... its a game... competitive or not, you dont get to ride in the first class section on a ride to heaven, you dont get another shot at the one that got away, and you certainly dont become a freakin' super hero... Youre that guy Im going to laugh at when I death or glory your Nemesis dreadknight with a rhino, and you cry that thats not fair.

and for the record,what does that have to do with anything? most consider necrons to be over powered and will look for any excuse to raise hell in order to get something FAQ'd to make them more secure about their little plastic men lol... give me a break

I'm sorry LoTS cannot hit zooming flyers/FMC's because the rules kinda say so. I'm sorry necrons don't get every advantage in the game.

BTW, how are you supposed to DoG with a Rhino?

You must be one of those jaded players I was talking about... too bad really. What happened? did you get tabled by a bunch of necron warriors? you dont have to be ashamed to admit it. thats how it should be lol

And you know what Im talking, stop pretending like you started playing the game... you tank shock a model and they attempt a death or glory if they wish to do so.

They were pointing out that your sentence didnt parse - you dont "death or glory" with a rhino, as you stated, the NDK performs a Death or Glory! and if failed is removed. You just didnt actually manage to write a coherent sentence there.

I would suggest, before you continue posting in YMDC, that you STOP ascribing negatives to others motives in a debate; it makes your argument really easy to ignore

Its called lingo here on planet earth. I was under the assumption that this was a friendly forum where you werent being followed like a fugitive.

speaking of which... if my argument is so easy to ignore why are you saying something about it? isnt that ascribing to a negative? or did you get a hug from a warscythe too and just cant stand another necron player making sense on your home turf?

Yes, it is a friendly text based forum, where constructing coherent sentences is an aid to understanding. Your comment about DoG a NDK with a rhino didnt make sense, so I was pointing out why James was having issues. ITs called trying to be helpful, good to know how you respond to that.

If by "making sense" you mean "ignoring rules", then yes, you are "making sense"

Again, you assume anyone arguing against you must not be a necron player. I will gve you a hint - you are wrong on this.

text deleted.
Reds8n

You need to step back, take a breather, whatever. You're being far too antagonistic and rude.

Okay, Let me see if I can understand where we are right now. There appears to be a RAW debate as to wether a special ability that is not described as a weapon in its rules can inflict damage on a vehicle. If it could not, then we could easily assume that you could not ram either. Obviously you can so that argument should be lain to rest. my previous argument, that LotS is a special ability, which is not disqualified by the HtH rule, and not disqualified directly by the FAQ like most other abilities, and therefor able to hti a zooming flyer still stands.

Can we continue from there?

hey Red! long time no see... you know I can be alot worse though... you gotta be a little proud that Im doing better right?

In all seriousness though, lightning hit a flier is legal lol

 WarlordRob117 wrote:
hey Red! long time no see... you know I can be alot worse though... you gotta be a little proud that Im doing better right?

In all seriousness though, lightning hit a flier is legal lol

Please follow th tenets of this forum by using actual rules in an argument

 WarlordRob117 wrote:
hey Red! long time no see... you know I can be alot worse though... you gotta be a little proud that Im doing better right?

I'm sure that if you put your mind to it you could craft weapons from words that would wound the Gods themselves, leave daemons weeping and searching for redemption and leave injuries that an eternity of time will not heal. Yet, mainly due to those pesky ol' forum rules, code of conduct and basic human decency that we expect users to abide by, we'd much rather you left such artifices for elsewhere and elsewhen, mayhaps for situations slightly more important that the ins and outs and whathaveyous of a game of toy soldiers.

Makes for a better experience for all.

Thank you.

copper.talos wrote:
LotS has no specific permission to hit flyers. And that should be enough since the faq is clear: only snap shots can hit a flyer.

DR is trying to say that if you try to rule lawyer that LotS should hit flyers using a "very strict RAW" argument, then he can use another "very strict RAW" argument to make LotS not damage any vehicle at all.

Have to applaude you for making a logial interpretation, with the fact that you are still a Necron player. This is not meant to be sarcastic in any way just a small salute.

And it's nice that we for once agree on something

 Vindicare-Obsession wrote:
Okay, Let me see if I can understand where we are right now. There appears to be a RAW debate as to wether a special ability that is not described as a weapon in its rules can inflict damage on a vehicle. If it could not, then we could easily assume that you could not ram either. Obviously you can so that argument should be lain to rest. my previous argument, that LotS is a special ability, which is not disqualified by the HtH rule, and not disqualified directly by the FAQ like most other abilities, and therefor able to hti a zooming flyer still stands.

Can we continue from there?

Sure. I think the debate about if something not described as a weapon can inflict damage on a vehicle is a distraction. I posted this in on page 12 of this thread, but for reference, I'll post it again (from the newest Necron FAQ):

You’ll also find that some of the weapons in this Codex are written out longhand, rather than using the weapon profile format in the Warhammer 40,000 rulebook. Don’t worry – these are functionally identical, unless noted otherwise in this document.

Note that the description for LotS says:

... the unit is struck by a bolt of lightning and suffers D6, Strength 8, AP 5 hits

That looks an awful lot like a longhand description of a weapon to me. If you don't think LotS is a weapon please explain why.

Because it is listed as a special rule and not a weapon. Its not in the wargear section, nor is it ever reffered to as a weapon. It dosent use Imo's LOS, or BS, or any of his other characteristics. I feel like you need more than a strength and AP to be considered a weapon, especially because as the profile stands right now, it is almost completely a seperate entity. It dosent follow night fighting rules, and isint described as a shooting attack. I am left to belive, with all of these things that are (or arent as it was) here it is not a "weapon" by wording of the rules.

 Vindicare-Obsession wrote:
Because it is listed as a special rule and not a weapon. Its not in the wargear section, nor is it ever reffered to as a weapon. It dosent use Imo's LOS, or BS, or any of his other characteristics. I feel like you need more than a strength and AP to be considered a weapon, especially because as the profile stands right now, it is almost completely a seperate entity. It dosent follow night fighting rules, and isint described as a shooting attack. I am left to belive, with all of these things that are (or arent as it was) here it is not a "weapon" by wording of the rules.

I disagree that LotS isn't a weapon. It has a range (the entire board), Strength, AP and some special rules that determine if it hits. It is my opinion that it is a weapon written 'longhand'. I think we'll have to agree to disagree here.

In any case, I think that if LotS is a weapon is largely irrelevant. the BRB FAQrules say 'only snap shots can hit Zooming Flyers and Swooping Monstrous Creatures'. It doesn't say 'weapons can only hit with snap shots', or 'hits from weapons must be fired as snap shots'. That is a very specific rule, 'only snap shots' means exactly that. I really don't see any wiggle room. The only thing that would bypass that is if an ability or rule or weapon grants specific permission to hit flyers, as Vector Strike does.

Please explain why 'only snap shots' doesn't apply to LotS.

That is a good point. I was under the impression that the wording for hard to hit was "Weapons or Attacks resolved against a flyer must be resolved as snapshots"

Now that I see the FAQ is all inclusive, I will conceed the argument.

Had to backtrack to page 9 to get the FAQ again but I see your point. I don't know how I've missed that post with as many times as I'm sure people have been using it.

 undertow wrote:

 Vindicare-Obsession wrote:
Because it is listed as a special rule and not a weapon. Its not in the wargear section, nor is it ever reffered to as a weapon. It dosent use Imo's LOS, or BS, or any of his other characteristics. I feel like you need more than a strength and AP to be considered a weapon, especially because as the profile stands right now, it is almost completely a seperate entity. It dosent follow night fighting rules, and isint described as a shooting attack. I am left to belive, with all of these things that are (or arent as it was) here it is not a "weapon" by wording of the rules.

I disagree that LotS isn't a weapon. It has a range (the entire board), Strength, AP and some special rules that determine if it hits. It is my opinion that it is a weapon written 'longhand'. I think we'll have to agree to disagree here.

In any case, I think that if LotS is a weapon is largely irrelevant. the BRB FAQrules say 'only snap shots can hit Zooming Flyers and Swooping Monstrous Creatures'. It doesn't say 'weapons can only hit with snap shots', or 'hits from weapons must be fired as snap shots'. That is a very specific rule, 'only snap shots' means exactly that. I really don't see any wiggle room. The only thing that would bypass that is if an ability or rule or weapon grants specific permission to hit flyers, as Vector Strike does.

Please explain why 'only snap shots' doesn't apply to LotS.

If the FAQ question was,

"What can hit a zooming flyer?"

Then, "only snap shots can hit a zooming flyer" would cover LotS. The problem you have is the same as DR in that you are removing context of the question and only nitpicking your answer. The question is specific to weapons and types of psychic shooting attacks that either automatically hit or do not roll to hit. That mechanic of those weapon/psychic shooting attacks is overridden by the "only snap shots can hit zooming flyers". The answer is specific and addressed to the question at hand.

For you to insist that the "only snap shots can hit zooming flyers" is all encompassing and not specific to the question, you negate any and all non-weapon hits on a zooming flyer, including special terrain or game effects that deliver non-weapon hits.

 Tyr Grimtooth wrote:

 undertow wrote:

 Vindicare-Obsession wrote:
Because it is listed as a special rule and not a weapon. Its not in the wargear section, nor is it ever reffered to as a weapon. It dosent use Imo's LOS, or BS, or any of his other characteristics. I feel like you need more than a strength and AP to be considered a weapon, especially because as the profile stands right now, it is almost completely a seperate entity. It dosent follow night fighting rules, and isint described as a shooting attack. I am left to belive, with all of these things that are (or arent as it was) here it is not a "weapon" by wording of the rules.

I disagree that LotS isn't a weapon. It has a range (the entire board), Strength, AP and some special rules that determine if it hits. It is my opinion that it is a weapon written 'longhand'. I think we'll have to agree to disagree here.

In any case, I think that if LotS is a weapon is largely irrelevant. the BRB FAQrules say 'only snap shots can hit Zooming Flyers and Swooping Monstrous Creatures'. It doesn't say 'weapons can only hit with snap shots', or 'hits from weapons must be fired as snap shots'. That is a very specific rule, 'only snap shots' means exactly that. I really don't see any wiggle room. The only thing that would bypass that is if an ability or rule or weapon grants specific permission to hit flyers, as Vector Strike does.

Please explain why 'only snap shots' doesn't apply to LotS.

If the FAQ question was,

"What can hit a zooming flyer?"

Then, "only snap shots can hit a zooming flyer" would cover LotS. The problem you have is the same as DR in that you are removing context of the question and only nitpicking your answer. The question is specific to weapons and types of psychic shooting attacks that either automatically hit or do not roll to hit. That mechanic of those weapon/psychic shooting attacks is overridden by the "only snap shots can hit zooming flyers". The answer is specific and addressed to the question at hand.

For you to insist that the "only snap shots can hit zooming flyers" is all encompassing and not specific to the question, you negate any and all non-weapon hits on a zooming flyer, including special terrain or game effects that deliver non-weapon hits.

Could you supply some examples of these special terrain or game effects that deliver non-weapon hits?

 undertow wrote:

 Tyr Grimtooth wrote:

 undertow wrote:

 Vindicare-Obsession wrote:
Because it is listed as a special rule and not a weapon. Its not in the wargear section, nor is it ever reffered to as a weapon. It dosent use Imo's LOS, or BS, or any of his other characteristics. I feel like you need more than a strength and AP to be considered a weapon, especially because as the profile stands right now, it is almost completely a seperate entity. It dosent follow night fighting rules, and isint described as a shooting attack. I am left to belive, with all of these things that are (or arent as it was) here it is not a "weapon" by wording of the rules.

I disagree that LotS isn't a weapon. It has a range (the entire board), Strength, AP and some special rules that determine if it hits. It is my opinion that it is a weapon written 'longhand'. I think we'll have to agree to disagree here.

In any case, I think that if LotS is a weapon is largely irrelevant. the BRB FAQrules say 'only snap shots can hit Zooming Flyers and Swooping Monstrous Creatures'. It doesn't say 'weapons can only hit with snap shots', or 'hits from weapons must be fired as snap shots'. That is a very specific rule, 'only snap shots' means exactly that. I really don't see any wiggle room. The only thing that would bypass that is if an ability or rule or weapon grants specific permission to hit flyers, as Vector Strike does.

Please explain why 'only snap shots' doesn't apply to LotS.

If the FAQ question was,

"What can hit a zooming flyer?"

Then, "only snap shots can hit a zooming flyer" would cover LotS. The problem you have is the same as DR in that you are removing context of the question and only nitpicking your answer. The question is specific to weapons and types of psychic shooting attacks that either automatically hit or do not roll to hit. That mechanic of those weapon/psychic shooting attacks is overridden by the "only snap shots can hit zooming flyers". The answer is specific and addressed to the question at hand.

For you to insist that the "only snap shots can hit zooming flyers" is all encompassing and not specific to the question, you negate any and all non-weapon hits on a zooming flyer, including special terrain or game effects that deliver non-weapon hits.

Could you supply some examples of these special terrain or game effects that deliver non-weapon hits?

Ether crystals affecting a deep striking flyer which counts as zooming.

That's the first thing that comes to mind.

 Kevin949 wrote:

 undertow wrote:

 Tyr Grimtooth wrote:

 undertow wrote:

 Vindicare-Obsession wrote:
Because it is listed as a special rule and not a weapon. Its not in the wargear section, nor is it ever reffered to as a weapon. It dosent use Imo's LOS, or BS, or any of his other characteristics. I feel like you need more than a strength and AP to be considered a weapon, especially because as the profile stands right now, it is almost completely a seperate entity. It dosent follow night fighting rules, and isint described as a shooting attack. I am left to belive, with all of these things that are (or arent as it was) here it is not a "weapon" by wording of the rules.

I disagree that LotS isn't a weapon. It has a range (the entire board), Strength, AP and some special rules that determine if it hits. It is my opinion that it is a weapon written 'longhand'. I think we'll have to agree to disagree here.

In any case, I think that if LotS is a weapon is largely irrelevant. the BRB FAQrules say 'only snap shots can hit Zooming Flyers and Swooping Monstrous Creatures'. It doesn't say 'weapons can only hit with snap shots', or 'hits from weapons must be fired as snap shots'. That is a very specific rule, 'only snap shots' means exactly that. I really don't see any wiggle room. The only thing that would bypass that is if an ability or rule or weapon grants specific permission to hit flyers, as Vector Strike does.

Please explain why 'only snap shots' doesn't apply to LotS.

If the FAQ question was,

"What can hit a zooming flyer?"

Then, "only snap shots can hit a zooming flyer" would cover LotS. The problem you have is the same as DR in that you are removing context of the question and only nitpicking your answer. The question is specific to weapons and types of psychic shooting attacks that either automatically hit or do not roll to hit. That mechanic of those weapon/psychic shooting attacks is overridden by the "only snap shots can hit zooming flyers". The answer is specific and addressed to the question at hand.

For you to insist that the "only snap shots can hit zooming flyers" is all encompassing and not specific to the question, you negate any and all non-weapon hits on a zooming flyer, including special terrain or game effects that deliver non-weapon hits.

Could you supply some examples of these special terrain or game effects that deliver non-weapon hits?

Ether crystals affecting a deep striking flyer which counts as zooming.

That's the first thing that comes to mind.

There is another game effect of lightning storms and then also some terrain features like vines and something else that deliver hits. I am at my office so core rulebook is at home, but there are some under the mysterious terrain and then ongoing game effects. I will post up the others when I get back home.