A game over the weekend came to a point of confusion about the land raider special rule "Machine Spirit" and we are still looking for clarification.

The Situation:
My LR (crusader style) moves 6 inches out of cover and into line of site of an opponets Wave Serpent. I pop smoke and then tell my opponet that under the "Machine Spirit" Special rule I will fire my pintle mounted Melta at his Wave Serpent.

Is the shot legal? The Rule states that a Land raider can always fire one more weapon than is normally allowed. Since the smoke rule states that the land raider cant fire any weapons, but the spcial rule "machine spirit" states that i can fire one more than allowed the shot should count. Or am I a little biased here?

Gimmie your opinions. Sorry there is no actual page quotes here. I' at work and dont have the codex with me.

Imo you aint allowed to shot because of the "smoke rule". MS Rule doesnt overwrite "Smoke Rule".

This is another loophole that needs an FAQ.

As per the Machine spirit rule, you may fire one more weapon than allowed using it.

As per the Smoke Launcher rule, you are not permitted to fire any weapons.

I would personally say you are not allowed any shots due to the Smoke Launcher rules. Some people may say you are allowed the one from the Machine Spirit.

We Rolled it off in the end and I didnt get the oppertunity to take my shots. Honestly I can see both sides to it. I guess the real question is does the smoke rule override everything? On similar exceptions it says verbatim in the rules "unless otherwise stated by a special rule". (See "Heavy" weapon classification in reguards to movement and assault)

The Power of the Machine Spirit rule doesn't state that "a Land raider can always fire one more weapon than is normally allowed". It says that: "A Land Raider can fire one more weapon than would normally be permitted."

There would be a conflict between the Power of the Machine Spirit rule and the Smoke Launchers rule if the Power of the Machine Spirit applied universally, rather than just in normal cases. The Smoke Launchers rule is a special case and says that: "The vehicle may not fire any of its weapons in the same turn as it used its smoke launchers,".

One more than normal is included in "any", so the Power of the Machine Spirit would not allow a Land Raider that popped smoke to fire a weapon.

My lack of exact wording is because i am at work Nurglitch. But still your logic does not defeat the question.

If a land raider moves at cruizing speed the rules say it can't fire any of its weapons. But then the power of the machine spirit allows it to fire one weapon. Just like if i pop smoke I can't fire any of my weapons. Shouldn't Machine spirit allow it then after that? There is very similar wording if I remember correctly.

Edited underlined word from combat

Nave686:

You might find it helps to discuss this sort of thing when you have the materials available to review.

As for logic defeating anything...

Anyhoo. The difference between a vehicle not normally being permitted to fire any weapons at cruising speed, and not being permitted to fire any weapons if it used its Smoke Launchers is that the Power of the Machine Spirit allows a Land Raider to fire one more weapon than would normally be permitted.

In other words, the Power of the Machine Spirit is an exception to normal cases, not to special cases.

Moving at cruising speed is a normal case. Using Smoke Launchers is a special case. The Power of the Machine Spirit works in the former case, and not the latter.

Actually by your logic, the PoTMS is a special case. So please prove with written rules that it is not allowed its shooting ability if you also use smoke launchers.

When you use Smoke Launchers, you are permitted to fire 0 weapons.

0 + 1 = 1.

Thus, you can fire one weapon after activating Smoke Launchers, if you have PotMS, until they FAQ it.

RAW you get to fire one weapon, but I don't think that's the intention. I'll probably get FAQed to not be allowed.

yeah,
I'm thinking RAI is that your surrounded by smoke and thus the crew can't see so can't shoot...

But POTMS RAW gives a clear example of the landraider 'Crew shaken' still allowing you to fire one weapon.

Crew Stunned

...vehicle may not move nor shoot until the end of it's next player turn.

Smoke launchers

...a vehicle may not fire any of it's weapons in the same turn as it used it's smoke launchers.

Both seem pretty similar to me and shaken kinda gives precidence to being able to shoot...
there is also the Codex trumps BGB arguement...

Still it's a tough call?

Panic...

Edit: I got my stunned and shaken mixed up... again...

Which is my point, there is no rules based answer. I personally would not shoot. My gaming group feels the same way.

Let's look at the relevant text, shall we?

Moving and Shooting Vehicle Weaponry, p.58, Rulebook wrote:The number of weapons a vehicle can fire in the shooting phase depends on how fast it has moved in that turn's Movement phase, as detailed below.

This is a normal case. The rules index the number of weapons with the sub-type of the vehicle on p.73.

Damage Results, p.61, Rulebook wrote:1 Crew - Shaken
The vehicle may not shoot until the end of its next player turn.

2 Crew - Stunned
The vehicle may not move nor shoot until the end of its next player turn.

Shaken and Stunned damage table results are also normal cases.

Power o the Machine Spirit, p.81, Codex: Space Marines wrote:A Land Raider can fire one more weapon than would normally be permitted.

Therefore, a Land Raider that has moved at combat speed can fire two weapons, and a Land Raider that has either moved at cruising speed, or has suffered a 'Crew Stunned' or 'Crew Shaken' result can fire a single weapon.

The rule gives four normal cases of when an extra weapon can be used.

Smoke Launchers, p.61, Rulebook wrote:Once per game, after completing its move, a vehicle with smoke launchers can trigger them (it doesn't matter how far it moved). Place some cotton wool or other suitable marker on or around the vehicle to show it is obscured. The vehicle may not fire any of its weapons in the same turn as it used its smoke launchers, but will count as obscured in the next enemy Shooting phase, receiving a 4+ cover save.

Smoke Launchers are a special case. The rules only apply to vehicles equipped with Smoke Launcher, and then only when they are used.

Smoke Launchers prohibit a vehicle from using any weapons. The Power of the Machine Spirit allows the vehicle to use one more weapon than normal. The Smoke Launchers are not a normal case. Therefore Smoke Launchers prohibit a vehicle from using any weapons, even if that vehicle has the Power of the Machine Spirit.

Nurglitch wrote:Let's look at the relevant text, shall we?

Power o the Machine Spirit, p.81, Codex: Space Marines]A Land Raider can fire one more weapon than would normally be permitted.

The whole argument rests on what is meant by Normally in that sentence. Is it normal for the game, or normal for the situation.

A Land Raider who fires off smoke would not normally be allowed to fire a weapon. However, POTMS does say it can fire an additional weapon.

A case of poor writing. I believe the intentions were for it to not be able to fire. In that, I agree with you Nurglitch, but I think your logic is failing in this case.

-Kyvik

my quote fu is weak...

"Your logic"?

Where do you people come up with this?

The rules say that the Power of the Machine Spirit only works in normal cases. Normal cases in Warhammer 40,000 are the cases that apply without special contradiction or exception, such as vehicles being Shaken or Stunned. Being a vehicle and being Shaken in 40k is normal. Special cases in this game are the cases that only apply under special conditions, such as vehicles equipped with either the Power of the Machine Spirit or Smoke Launchers. Hence the reference of the term "normal" in the Warhammer 40,000 rules is restricted to stuff that would restrict any vehicle from firing, rather than only that special sub-set of vehicles with special equipment.

Nurglitch wrote:The rules say that the Power of the Machine Spirit only works in normal cases.

No they don't.

They say that the vehicle can fire one more weapon that it normally could.

As Kyvik just pointed out, a vehicle that has fired smoke can normally not fire any weapons.
One more than none is 1.


There are two interpretations here. Yours is only one of them.


Admittedly it's the one that removes the contradiction, which in my opinion makes it the best one to apply... but YMDC has never been about which interpretation makes the most sense, as that's purely subjective.

insaniak:

When the rules say that the vehicle can fire one more weapon than it normally could, that's saying that the Power of the Machine Spirit only works in normal cases.

Kyvik was wrong when he suggested that a vehicle that has used Smoke Launcher can normally not fire any weapons, because the rule is a special case and makes no mention of being a normal case. In fact, thanks to the use of the term 'any', without any qualifier, the Smoke Launcher over-rules the Power of the Machine Spirit.

Let's take the instance of a Land Raider moving at cruising speed. It is normally the case that a vehicle moving at cruising speed cannot use any weapons. The Power of the Machine Spirit allows the Land Raider to fire one more weapon than it normally could. So the Land Raider can use 1 weapon. If the Land Raider uses its Smoke Launchers, it cannot use any weapons, regardless of whether their number is 1, 1 more than normal (1+x), or Pi.

Finally, the opinion that sense is purely subjective is wrong. Sense is a matter that is objective.

Nurglitch wrote:When the rules say that the vehicle can fire one more weapon than it normally could, that's saying that the Power of the Machine Spirit only works in normal cases.

No, that's what you think it's saying. And then you're applying your own arbitrary categorisation as to what is 'normal' and what isn't.


At this stage, both sides have been presented and anyone reading this thread is going to have to make up their own mind anyway... so how about we just pretend that we've already had the 5-page discussion in which both sides just restate their position and find new and creative ways to malign the other side's command of the english language.

You can even pretend you won, if you like.

Until its FAQ'ed, there is no true answer. Its all just house rules.

insaniak:

Yes, of course that's what I think it's saying, and I believe that for reasons that I think we can all share.

As for saying that I'm simply "applying your own arbitrary categorisation as to what is 'normal' and what isn't", how is that any different from what you're doing? Probably best not to tar someone with your own faults, where the truth is what's at interest.

Speaking of truth, it couldn't be further from the truth that the semantics of the term "normal" I'm using here is arbitrary. I'm drawing the categorization of what is normal and what is not (i.e. 'special') from the rules themselves. As I've explained, 'normal' is what applies categorically, and not normal ('special') is what applies hypothetically, or under narrower conditions.

Now, I can easily imagine why you wouldn't think it's useful to continue this discussion, because that would require intellectual effort on your part, and you're not interested in the truth anyways.

But I don't think finding the truth is a matter of the sort of competitive bickering that you seem to mistake for argument. Finding the truth is a matter of stating principles, making arguments, and checking proofs. We can cite the text as evidence, show how that evidence supports or proves our conclusions, and then weigh the co-relative merits of the evidence and our conclusions. That is, if we were both interested in getting to the bottom of it.

As you seem to suggest though, such a task is beyond your capabilities or interest. So I guess we will just have to leave it there.

Nurglitch wrote:As for saying that I'm simply "applying your own arbitrary categorisation as to what is 'normal' and what isn't", how is that any different from what you're doing?

The difference is that you're claiming that your interpretation is the only valid one.
I'm saying that your interpretation is only one of two that are potentially valid.

Or, to be more specific, I'm not the one claiming that 'normal' means only what I say it does.

You've presented your 'evidence'
Others have presented a differing view.

Both have merit within the rules as presented, and so the solution remains one of personal interpretation.

Past experience suggests that there is minimal chance of you accepting that any interpretation other than your own can possibly be correct, and that you're unlikely to provide any actual rules-based argument for this... and so further discussion with you is pointless.

Nothing to do with not being 'interested in the truth'... simply a matter of not caring to repeatedly bash my head against a wall for no good reason.

insaniak wrote:

At this stage, both sides have been presented and anyone reading this thread is going to have to make up their own mind anyway... so how about we just pretend that we've already had the 5-page discussion in which both sides just restate their position and find new and creative ways to malign the other side's command of the english language.

You can even pretend you won, if you like.

Sigged.

Nurglitch contradicts himself.

As I've explained, 'normal' is what applies categorically, and not normal ('special') is what applies hypothetically, or under narrower conditions.

How on earth you then go on to class shaken/stunned as 'normal' is beyond me. Unless your vehicles start out shaken and stunned somehow?

To the OP:

You can read some further discussion on this matter here:

http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/219946.page

I had forgotten about that thread. It's an interesting read, if only for this little gem:

Nurglitch wrote:It seems to me that in this case a Land Raider with the Power of the Machine Spirit rule can use a weapon when it has blown smoke, since the rule is that ordinarily blowing smoke prevents a vehicle from using any weapons, and the Power of the Machine Spirit rule allows the Land Raider to fire one more weapon than ordinarily permitted.

yeah,
Nurglitch, I respect his tenacity and I normally see the reason in his Logic, and if he wants to swap side he can!
But I think RAW is beating RAI with a big stick on this Rules interpretaion...

From this thread...

Nurglitch wrote:Normal cases in Warhammer 40,000 are the cases that apply without special contradiction or exception, such as vehicles being Shaken or Stunned. Being a vehicle and being Shaken in 40k is normal.

All Marine Vehicles now come with Smoke launchers as Standard/Free, so the Normal cases in Warhammer 40,000 is for these vehicles to be poping smoke...

Panic...

Doesnt it seem just a little more conceivable now, what with the new rules on smoke launchers (4+ cover save) that Machine spirit may allow you to shoot?

Smoke gives you a 4+ cover save as does terrain, both may still allow you to shoot. I know terrain doenst really have anything to do with how many weapons can fire, the whole idea of vehicles firing after 'smoke' just seems more plausible to me now that its not an auto-glance anymore.

Not saying it should go either way...just saying.

Yeah,
That's a good point, It kind of give the impression that the smokes swirls around the tank but there are occationally gaps that the enemy can see through...

If you fire with POTMS, through your own (cover) smoke, does a enemy tank get a 4+ cover save? I think it should, but there's nothing to support...

Panic...

insaniak wrote:I had forgotten about that thread. It's an interesting read, if only for this little gem:

Nurglitch wrote:It seems to me that in this case a Land Raider with the Power of the Machine Spirit rule can use a weapon when it has blown smoke, since the rule is that ordinarily blowing smoke prevents a vehicle from using any weapons, and the Power of the Machine Spirit rule allows the Land Raider to fire one more weapon than ordinarily permitted.

Wow!

So, Nurglitch, how do you explain that one?

(Other than maybe you're living in SoCal and are often found wearing flip-flops?)

insaniak wrote:I had forgotten about that thread. It's an interesting read, if only for this little gem:

Nurglitch wrote:It seems to me that in this case a Land Raider with the Power of the Machine Spirit rule can use a weapon when it has blown smoke, since the rule is that ordinarily blowing smoke prevents a vehicle from using any weapons, and the Power of the Machine Spirit rule allows the Land Raider to fire one more weapon than ordinarily permitted.

LOL

Pwned.


That just goes to prove something I've always believed... Nurglitch can use his particular brand of disseminating information and presenting "facts" to prove both sides of any given rule that is not specifically and explicitly stated.

Of course, he could prove that every rule is specifically and explicitly stated, as well... and not necessarily the same way each time.

Eric

I don't see a problem. There was a problem with the proof I presented in the previous thread, and I've corrected it. Some people would approve of such intellectual honesty...

Speaking of which, does anyone else find it amusing that I had made a mistake in a previous thread, corrected it in this thread, and then got excoriated for "flip-flopping" or contradicting myself? I said I was 25 last year and 26 this year. What an inconsistent flip-flopper I must be.

WOW hahahahahahahahahahaha Nurglitch you make me laugh and im at work so thanks, its boring here.

I personally really like the argument:

Smoke launcher grants a cover save.

Vehicles can fire out of cover.

PotMS lets a Land Raider fire one more shot than normal.

I still don't think I'll play it that way because it's such a change from previous canon, but I'd eagerly await an FAQ on this subject.

I'm glad this post excited such a heated discussion. Unfortunatly we are at the same point reached at the origional problem during the game: stalemate. RAW vs RAI.... Sigh... guess we all have to wait for GW to tell us how to think.

Strict RAW looks like PotMS can be used to override the Smoke effect.

However, this flies in the face of all precedent for both PotMS and smoke launchers.

Send this one to askyourquestion@GW and let us know what John Spencer replied, if you would?

sourclams wrote:Strict RAW looks like PotMS can be used to override the Smoke effect.

However, this flies in the face of all precedent for both PotMS and smoke launchers.

Send this one to askyourquestion@GW and let us know what John Spencer replied, if you would?

Wilco

sourclams wrote:Strict RAW looks like PotMS can be used to override the Smoke effect.

However, this flies in the face of all precedent for both PotMS and smoke launchers.

Send this one to askyourquestion@GW and let us know what John Spencer replied, if you would?

I would agree on this even though I could argue semantics over word usage.

Ps Everyone who says about cannot see through smoke as a background justification for why you cannot shoot etc - ever thought POTMS might be like an auspex and can "see" through smoke.

Nurglitch wrote:I don't see a problem. There was a problem with the proof I presented in the previous thread, and I've corrected it. Some people would approve of such intellectual honesty...

Speaking of which, does anyone else find it amusing that I had made a mistake in a previous thread, corrected it in this thread, and then got excoriated for "flip-flopping" or contradicting myself? I said I was 25 last year and 26 this year. What an inconsistent flip-flopper I must be.

entirely off topic:

I was going to just say my piece then stay out but this comment is too rich.

Arguing in two different directions on a single topic while the facts of that topic (codex entry) have not changed is flipping your position on the topic.

The facts regarding your age change on a yearly basis. You indeed are a year older than you were last year, so the correct statement would be "I was 25 last year and I am 26 this year". There is no flop in that statement. For someone who enjoys word play as much as you, I would have assumed you already knew this.

RAW = fire 1 weapon
RAI = fire nothing

thats my two cents (or is it 4, since I already stated it once)

Kyvik:

What, am I supposed to take a position and zealously guard it against all dissent merely because it is mine?

Should I not, upon closer and more careful examination, change my position to better reflect what I should consider true?

By the way, congratulations on discovering an instance of irony: to whit declaring that I am a flip-flopper for uttering a set of consistent statements. If you look carefully, you may even detect sarcasm.

Oh give it up. You sound like a Japanese fish wife. You argued two opposing arguments on the exact same topic two weeks apart. The rules didn't change, the game didn't change, the context didn't change, and the amount of games you've played didn't change.

Take your knuck and move on.

sourclams:

I have. I've pointed out that I was previously in error, and pointed out how I've amended my analysis of the rules. So either point out how my amended reading fails, or STFU.

I can't help but laugh at people trying to make something of nurglitch's prior comment, he made a single post contributing to that thread and didn't offer much support for it, here he has undertaken a close examination of the rules and supported his stance, yet the discrepency between conclusions is somehow meant to be indicative of some character flaw.

Even if he had offered stronger support in the first thread, I can tell you there is more than one rule that has seemed clear cut to me until other people contribute their views.

Woodrow Wilson famously said 'If you want to make enemies, try to change something.' But I don't think he had changing your own opinion in mind. Must we really take so much pleasure in discrediting the views of a member of this forum on the basis of a change in opinion weeks apart.

I believe that the uproar about Nurgly's posts stems directly from the fact that he didn't state "I previously believed X was the correct way to play, but after consideration I have changed my mind and now believe Y is the way to go."

However I'm willing to give him the benefit of the doubt; He, like Insaniak, merely forgot about the previous thread.

I'd still like to see an explanation of how popping smoke on occasion is conditional (therefore not normal) but being shaken or stunned on occasion is unconditional (therefore normal)? It's an important question since 'normality' is the at the heart of Nurglitch's revised position.

There's really no mechanical definition in the 40k rules for what is "normal" and what isn't. They're game states inferred from what units typically do or not.

What it comes down to in my eyes is that we have a new rules structure that will allow PotMS and Smoke Launchers to interact differently than before. This new interpretation, though, is so different from previous a lot of people will probably call it bending or twisting the rules, which will cause a lot of problems for those actually trying to game.

I'd say that the norm is they can't fire, but wouldn't be surprised if FAQ allowed it. If it does, however, expect a lot more screaming from the SPAZE MRIENZ CHEEZ crowd.

The problem with Nurglitch's position is that he was caught in a direct conflict with his earlier position, and then attempted to weasel out of his earlier position by claiming that he had changed his mind. If he had come right out at the beginning, and said "I had an opinion earlier, I have thought more on it, and come to the realization that my previous position was wrong" that would have been a very strong and compelling position. As it is, it comes across as though he has to win the argument, no matter which side he's on. Which wrecks his credibility. That is unfair, however - as Lordhat says, Nurglitch is due the benefit of the doubt - I certainly do not remember everything I ever have said.

Nurglitch, perhaps you can tell us why you have done a 180 degree turn from your prior stance? I must agree with Sourclams that while it looks like a bad rule on first glance, it is actually the correct rule to allow the PotMS to shoot through smoke.

Crew Shaken and Crew Stunned are functions of the basic rules structure of the game. Much like normally taking wounds and saving, movement rules, etc.

PotMS and Smoke Launchers are special rules that override "normal" rules functions to perform an act that is not otherwise part of the rules set. PotMS overriding shooting restrictions and Smoke Launchers overriding cover rules in non-cover situations. The proliferation of these exceptional circumstances has no real bearing on the situation. They are still situations that aren't normal functions of the rules. When the PotMS references normal, the standard baseline for normal is the functions of the rules and not what is most commonly fielded in armies across the game.

Because of the way that PotMS is written, it only fires one more weapon than is "normally" allowed. Because smoke launchers are a rules overriding situation, they are inherently not "normal" and thus you shouldn't be able to apply PotMS rule to a vehicle using smoke.

Ultimately, I understand that this is a situation that is only going to be solved by an FAQ and that the two sides have pretty much staked their claim to their versions of the truth. I'm just saying this is the side that makes the most sense within the scope of the rules as I see it and this might help quell some arguments somewhere along the line. Enjoy.

Nurglitch wrote:The Power of the Machine Spirit rule doesn't state that "a Land raider can always fire one more weapon than is normally allowed". It says that: "A Land Raider can fire one more weapon than would normally be permitted."

There would be a conflict between the Power of the Machine Spirit rule and the Smoke Launchers rule if the Power of the Machine Spirit applied universally, rather than just in normal cases. The Smoke Launchers rule is a special case and says that: "The vehicle may not fire any of its weapons in the same turn as it used its smoke launchers,".

One more than normal is included in "any", so the Power of the Machine Spirit would not allow a Land Raider that popped smoke to fire a weapon.

If the smoke launchers are an exception to whatever is normal, why does this even matter? The codex rules explicitly state that a Land Raider can fire one more than normal.

Using smoke makes it so the vehicle cannot fire any weapons. Then you look to the PotMS rules, and check how many it the vehicle would normally be permitted to fire, and then add one to this number. That should be the total number of shots it should be able to fire.

I read normally as meaning 'without PotMS', not under the arbitrary assigment that some people appear to be giving it. Otherwise you're claiming Crew Shaken is normal but using smoke isn't. That seems completely unfounded.

Shaggoth wrote:PotMS and Smoke Launchers are special rules that override "normal" rules functions to perform an act that is not otherwise part of the rules set.

Smoke Launchers have rules in the 5th edition rulebook. How are you defining them as "special" rather than "normal"?

Traskel:

Shaggoth isn't defining the Power of the Machine Spirit and Smoke Launchers as special, it's just that, as he says, their interactions with other rules in the game make them special cases of, and exceptions to, more general rules.

One more weapon than normal is one more (Main or Defensive, inclusive) weapon than would normally be allowed for that vehicle's states of speed, type, and damage.

A Land Raider firing a weapon when moving at cruising speed contradicts the general rule for that type of vehicle moving at cruising speed. The Power of the Machine Spirit rule allows this exception to what it normally the case.

Likewise, a Land Raider gaining a 4+ Cover save and not being able to fire any weapons. Now, just as the Power of the Machine Spirit rule does not further subdivide the class of weapons into the sub-classes of Main weapons and Defensive weapons, Smoke Launchers do not distinguish between weapons that are fired normally and weapons that are fired thanks to a special rule.

Nurglitch wrote:Often terms like 'therefore' are used to indicate exemplars of whatever conclusions that can be drawn from the application of a rule.

So what did I get wrong here? I took the two situations given as examples as being general because they were in the rulebook as opposed to being special because they were the Codex. After all, Codex trumps Rulebook. So this sentence is true, and I misapplied the rules by confusing what was relevant (how rules applied to objects in the game), and what was irrelevant (a rule of thumb for preferring contradictory rules by order of precedence).

Nurglitch wrote:It seems to me that in this case a Land Raider with the Power of the Machine Spirit rule can use a weapon when it has blown smoke, since the rule is that [wrong]ordinarily blowing smoke prevents a vehicle from using any weapons[/wrong], and the Power of the Machine Spirit rule allows the Land Raider to fire one more weapon than ordinarily permitted.

Ordinarily blowing smoke prevents a vehicle from using any weapons, but blowing smoke is not ordinary. In other words, using Smoke Launchers ordinarily prevents a vehicle from using any weapons, but using Smoke Launchers is not ordinary since 1/game and only on vehicles with Smoke Launchers special rule. Whereas at any given time all vehicles have a state of type, speed, and damage, only some also have a state of using Smoke Launchers (have not yet, have, have previously).

Note an interesting implication for this: A vehicle with the Power of the Machine Spirit can fire one weapon if all of its weapons have been destroyed. But fortunately, the Power of the Machine Spirit is necessary, but not sufficient for a Land Raider to actually fire one weapon if all of its weapons have been destroyed.

This is the way I see it:

1) "The vehicle may not fire any of its weapons in the same turn as it used its smoke launchers..."

The wording of the rule refers to the weapons but to the actual model. In other words: "The vehicle may not fire its Twin-linked Lascannons or its Twin-linked Heavy Bolters in the same turn as it used its smoke launchers..."

2) "A Land Raider can fire one more weapon than would normally be permitted."

Yes, the Land Raider can fire an additional weapon when poppin smoke but it still can not fire its Lascannons or Heavy Bolter since the Smoke Launcher rule forbids it.

3) To be able to fire while smoking the wording would have to be something like: "The vehicle may not shoot in the same turn as it used its smoke launchers...," in a similar fashion that Crew Stunned/Shaken is written. In this case the reference is to the vehicle it self and PotMS overrides that.

Nurglitch:

Based on your argument of using smoke launchers being a "special" case shouldn't the following apply in the case of a vehicle with PotMS popping smoke?

Normally the vehicle can fire x shots (based on movement or whatever conditions are satisfied in "normal" rules)
The vehicle pops smoke and can fire 0 shots (based on "special" rules)
The vehicle has PotMS and can therefor shoot x+1 shots (based on "normal" rules +1)

This is how I would carry out the logic based on your "special" and "normal" classifications. The PotMS rules specify one more shot than is "normally" permitted not "either how much the smoke special rule allows you to fire or one more than the smoke special rule allows you to fire" which seem to be the numbers being thrown around the thread.

Maybe I am butchering your interpretation, but this is what I come away with when I read the two rules under your interpretation. Reading the "normally" quote as Traskel suggested (just as "without PotMS" seems to simplify things)

No one is right, and no one is ever going to be right because "normal" is not a defined game term. You can decide what your interpretation of 'Normal' is, you can create arguments to support your side, but ultimately the house of cards falls apart because the entire premise is based on your interpretation of 'normal' as a game term. We can beat our head into a wall or we can email that John Spencer guy and see what GW's "opinion" on the matter is to at least find some common consensus.

Nurglitch wrote:Likewise, a Land Raider gaining a 4+ Cover save and not being able to fire any weapons. Now, just as the Power of the Machine Spirit rule does not further subdivide the class of weapons into the sub-classes of Main weapons and Defensive weapons, Smoke Launchers do not distinguish between weapons that are fired normally and weapons that are fired thanks to a special rule.

Show me where this train of thought fails:

Normally, when a vehicles uses smoke launchers, it cannot fire any weapons.

A vehicle with PotMS can fire one more weapon that would normally be allowed.

A vehicle using PotMS can fire one more weapon than it normally would be able to (if it didn't have PotMS) after using smoke launchers.

In this particular case, you have 0 + 1 = 1 shot.

It seems like you're trying to say that the rule in the rulebook that states that smoke launchers prevent you from firing any weapons is overriding the special rule in the codex, which is backwards from the way things work (codex overrides rulebook).

Traskel:

Yes, in my last post I talked about how my original application of the "Codex trumps Rulebook" rule of thumb failed because both Smoke Launchers and the Power of the Machine Spirit are special rules.

So, let's review were that train of thought fails:

P1. Normally, when a vehicle uses Smoke Launchers, it cannot fire any weapons.

P2. A vehicle with the Power of the Machine Spirit can fire one more weapon than would normally be allowed.

P3. A vehicle with the Power of the Machine Spirit can fire one more weapon than it normally would be able to (if it didn't have the Power of the Machine Spirit) after using Smoke Launchers.

C4. Therefore, since 0 (P1), +1 (P2), and 0+1 (P3), the vehicle can fire one weapon.

Firstly, this train of thought, an 'argument' if you will, fails because the number of weapons that a Land Raider is allowed to use depends on its Speed, its Damage, and its Type, all the characteristics that normally affects the number of weapons such a vehicle can fire.

Saying that Smoke Launchers 'normally', when used, prevent a vehicle from using any weapons is misleading because the Smoke Launchers rule is a special rule, an exception to the normal shooting rules.

So when a vehicle with the Power of the Machine Spirit can fire one more weapon than would normally be allowed, it can fire one more weapon than would be allowed by just its Type, Speed, and Damage.

The Smoke Launchers rule does not distinguish between the number of weapons that a vehicle can fire normally, or the number of weapons that a Land Raider can fire due to a special rule such as the Power of the Machine Spirit (just as the Power of the Machine Spirit doesn't say whether the extra weapon must be a Main weapon or a Defensive weapon, the unqualified reference to 'weapon' makes it inclusive).

Therefore, Traskel, that argument is invalid because the conclusion does not follow from the premises, and indeed misrepresents the premises.

It is not the case that the Smoke Launchers prevent a Land Raider from firing any weapons that it would normally be able to fire, and then firing one extra weapon because of the Power of the Machine Spirit.

It is actually the case that the Power of the Machine Spirit enables a Land Raider to fire an extra weapon on top of any weapons that it would normally be able to fire, and then the Smoke Launchers would prevent the Land Raider from firing any of those weapons, both weapons it would normally be able to fire, and weapons that require a special rule to fire, since it makes no distinction between these two types of weapon.

So let us take the number of weapons that a Land Raider can normally fire thanks to its states of Type, Speed, and Damage. This number is a variable, so let us call this number x.

Therefore, the total number of weapons that a Land Raider can fire in virtue of possessing the Power of the Machine Spirit, is x+1.

Now since Smoke Launchers prevent a vehicle from firing any weapons, regardless of whether that firing is enabled normally or specially, we take however many weapons a Land Raider can fire, normally and specially, and subtract that number from itself, giving us: (x+1) - (x+1).

So in the case of the Power of the Machine Spirit and Smoke Launchers interacting, we have:

P1. [-(x + y)|x is normal, y is special]
P2. y=1
P3. x+1
C4. (x+1)-(x+1)=0

... well i remember all the fuss about Yo-Yo Swooping hawks and every one complaining that they shouldn't be able to...

... in game turns smoke launchers only work for one turn PotMS lets you fire an extra weapon. Personally, i don't think this is going to be a game winner...

Nurglitch wrote:
So when a vehicle with the Power of the Machine Spirit can fire one more weapon than would normally be allowed, it can fire one more weapon than would be allowed by just its Type, Speed, and Damage.

This statement is unfounded based on the PotMS entry. It is purely interpretation. The interaction between PotMS and "special" rules are not clearly stated. This would lead to either ignoring the effect of special rules when a vehicle has PotMS (since it is not mentioned in the entry) or accomodating the entry to account for the effects of the special rule. I would tend to think if a rule in the general rule set is contradicted by a codex rule (even if there is no direct interaction between the two rules) that the codex rule has priority.

Spif:

That statement is well founded on both the general rules that govern how many weapons a vehicle can fire, and the Power of the Machine Spirit.

What normally defines the number of weapons a vehicle can use is the vehicle's Type, Speed, and Damage. These characteristics are what define the basic or 'normal' case.

A fast vehicle moving at cruising speed with all of its main weapons destroyed, for example, can only fire its secondary weapons.

The Power of the Machine Spirit is a special rule, but all it does is add to the number of weapons that such a vehicle would normally be allowed to fire.

The total number of weapons that a vehicle can fire is then obviously the normal number of weapons that it can fire plus the number of weapons that it can fire due to special rules.

Smoke Launchers prohibit a vehicle from firing any weapons, regardless of whether those weapons would other be permitted by the normal rules or by some special rule.

Nurglitch wrote:

What normally defines the number of weapons a vehicle can use is the vehicle's Type, Speed, and Damage. These characteristics are what define the basic or 'normal' case.

Can you quote any rules on this or is this still just interpretation?

Spif:

See "Moving and Shooting Vehicle Weaponry", p.58, "Shooting At Vehicles" pp.60-61, and "Vehicles Moving & Shooting Summary Chart", p.73.

Again, there is no such thing as a "normal" rule. Until an FAQ clears this up, its up to a per person interpretation.

^ yup.

Yes, absolutely no rules that vehicles normally follow for firing weapons. None at all. None whatsoevever.

Nurglitch I don't understand why you're so dead set against this.

Normally a vehicle who is shaken cannot fire any weapons, however with POTMS it may fire one.

Normally a vehicle who has fired smoke cannot fire any weapons, however with POTMS it may fire one.


How do the rules differentiate between those two sentences?

Yes, I agree this is counter to the intentions of the rules, however for someone who is such a dyed in the wool fan of RAW I would think you would see it this way as well.

Kyvik:

I'm not dead set against anything. I'm just pointing out that the statement "Normally a vehicle who has fired smoke cannot fire any weapons, however with POTMS it may fire one" is false if we follow the rules as they're stated in the rule books.

What is the difference?

Well, let's belabour what I had thought was some simple algebra. Take the number of weapons that a vehicle can normally fire given its Type, Speed, and Damage, and call this variable x.

Now take the number of weapons that a vehicle can fire given some special rule such as the Power of the Machine Spirit. Call this variable y, and in the case of the Power of the Machine Spirit, y=1.

So the total number of weapons that a vehicle can fire is z, and z=x+y.

So what is going on when a Land Raider is Shaken? Easy, z=(x+y)-x, z=1.

But a vehicle that has used its Smoke Launchers cannot fire any weapons, and, unlike the Power of the Machine Spirit rule, makes no distinction between the weapons that a vehicle can normally fire (x) and the weapons that require a special rule to fire (y).

Therefore a Land Raider with the Power of the Machine Spirit using its Smoke Launchers can fire a total of 0 weapons, because z=(x+y)-(x+y).

Basically, using a Smoke Launcher is not a case of what might normally permit however many weapons a vehicle can fire, whereas being Shaken (a value of Damage) is a case of what might normally affect however many weapons a vehicle might fire.

May I ask what I am doing to make this unclear?

Kyvik wrote:Nurglitch I don't understand why you're so dead set against this.

Normally a vehicle who is shaken cannot fire any weapons, however with POTMS it may fire one.

Normally a vehicle who has fired smoke cannot fire any weapons, however with POTMS it may fire one.


How do the rules differentiate between those two sentences?

Yes, I agree this is counter to the intentions of the rules, however for someone who is such a dyed in the wool fan of RAW I would think you would see it this way as well.

I actually do see where he's coming from. On page 58 of the rulebook it says:
"the number of weapons a vehicle can fire in the shooting phase depends on how fast it has moved in that turn's movement phase."
So according to the rules, a stationary vehicle may fire all, a vehicle moving at combat speed may fire one, etc. PoTMS allows you to fire that plus one. The rules imply that those are the "normal" conditions for shooting, and PoTMS adds one to that.

On the other hand I disagree with the use of "normal" in this case. I think that they only added in "normally may be permitted" to stop an infinite regress. If the codex just said "The land raider may always fire one extra weapon" it would beg the question "well not that it's fired that one more weapon, may it now fire one MORE weapon? RAW says it can always fire one more weapon..."

This rule really does seem to be fully unclear. Both power of the machine spirit and smoke launchers are special rules that override the standard rules, and in which order they do so isn't specifically mentioned anywhere in the book. On one hand, you could argue that PoTMS is a 'lesser' override, and that it occurs before smoke launchers (meaning you are prevented from firing (x+1) guns). On the other hand, you could just as easily make the argument that codex rules trump BRB rules, and PoTMS would come afterwards (you can fire no guns + 1, meaning one gun).

I'd say this rule is just plain not clear, and requires an official or unofficial ruling to sort out.

PirateRobotNinjaofDeath:

I'd suggest that it's clearer if you try to express the two position algrebraically; as the difficulty in representing the Codex trumps Rulebook argument may also suggest.

If that doesn't work, try interpretive dance.

oh magic eight ball what is the anwer? can PotMS be used with smoke launchers to get an extra weapon shooting? ... "you're going to die" ... may be i shouldn't have asked

http://lord.xopl.com/ulpage3a/8-ball.html if you want a go

Mod:
Ok guys, stay on topic please
Mod off

Nurglitch wrote:

So what is going on when a Land Raider is Shaken? Easy, z=(x+y)-x, z=1.

...

Therefore a Land Raider with the Power of the Machine Spirit using its Smoke Launchers can fire a total of 0 weapons, because z=(x+y)-(x+y).

May I ask what I am doing to make this unclear?

This attempt at defining a function to describe the number of shots a LR is very unclear. In your descriptions, you actually have two different functions (z=y and z=0) which are not consistent.

Describing a conditional function may make it more clear:

s(a,b,c)=c*a+b

alternatively you could interpret the appropriate function as

s(a,b,c)=c*(a+b)


Where
c is defining the state of using smoke launchers (0 if you have 1 if you have not)
a is defining the number of shots normally you get to shoot
b is defining the number of shots allowed by other rules
s(a,b,c) is the number of shots allowed to fire


a and b are obviously more complicated functions than described here, but that is not really the crux of the argument at hand.

Also, I thought this response to my question was particularly amusing. John must be able to read minds. If this is going to get FAQ'd this is probably how things are going to go. Not that I agree with it from a rules point of view.

From: Spif
Sent: Thursday, November 27, 2008 11:09 AM
To: askyourquestion
Subject: Question



How many shots does a Land Raider normally get to fire after having
popped smoked in the same turn?



Hello,

A Land Raider that uses its smoke launchers cannot fire that turn, not
even with Power of the Machine Spirit.



Thanks!



John Spencer

Customer Service Specialist



Please do not delete previous email threads as this will help us serve
you better!



Games Workshop

Customer Service

6711 Baymeadow Drive Suite A

Glen Burnie MD 21060



Games Workshop Customer Service is open:

Monday through Friday 9:00 Am to 7:00 PM EST



Contact info:

1-888-248-2335

custserv@games-workshop.com



Or visit us online at:

www.games-workshop.com <http://www.games-workshop.com/>

_____

Spif wrote:
Describing a conditional function may make it more clear:

s(a,b,c)=c*a+b

alternatively you could interpret the appropriate function as

s(a,b,c)=c*(a+b)


Where
c is defining the state of using smoke launchers (0 if you have 1 if you have not)
a is defining the number of shots normally you get to shoot
b is defining the number of shots allowed by other rules
s(a,b,c) is the number of shots allowed to fire

This is what I was trying to say. you either get (c*a)+b or c*(a+b). The order in which the two conditions are applied isn't specified anywhere. The "normal" argument seems to make sense to me, even though I think (as i said) that normally is simply there to forbid an infinite loop of:

# of guns = # of guns + 1

On the other hand, smoke launchers are in the BGB, while PoTMS is codex, and codex>BGB?

So ya, I'd just go with the customer service ruling on this: c*(a+b)

And thus was Mathhammer born into the material universe.

You guys are just over complicating this. Everyone take out their Occam's Razors, cut out the fat in this thread, and get down to the meat.

RAW seems to indicate that machine spirit will always allow you to shoot at least one weapon regardless of the tank's status. It specifically states that you will be able to shoot at least one more weapon than normal.

So then the question arises...is popping smoke a normal status? It specifically states that you cannot shoot any weapons. Or perhaps the question we should be asking is: Does smoke apply before Machine Spirit or After? In the end there are no officially released rules that state it one way or the other unless you count John Spencer.

Personally, I don't believe you can shoot after popping smoke. It's how I play and how our group plays.

Spif:

I thought it was clear that z=1 where a Land Raider was Shaken, since z is the total number of weapons the Land Raider can fire, and z=x+y, with x being the number of weapons that the Land Raider could normally fire, and y being the number of weapons that the Land Raider could fire thanks to special rules.

This does not contradict z=y, because when a Land Raider has the Power of the Machine Spirit, y=1. If a Land Raider is Shaken, then the number of weapons it can fire is normally 0, as indicated by x-x=0, leaving z=y.

But let's do it the way you suggest (altering it somewhat so that we use the key words used in the text) where:

a is the number of weapons the vehicle may normally fire given conditions of Type, Speed, and Damage.

b is the number of weapons allowed by special rules including the Power of the Machine Spirit.

c is defining the state of using smoke launchers (0 if yes, 1 if no).

s(a,b,c) is the total number of weapons allowed to fire

So we have the options of:

1. s(a,b,c)=c*a+b

2. s(a,b,c)=c*(a+b)

Taking the values of s to be (1,1,0) for a Land Raider that is moving at cruising speed, that is undamaged, and that has used its Smoke Launchers, #1 returns a value of 1, and #2 returns a value of 0.

But the Smoke Launchers rule specifies that the vehicle is prohibited from firing any weapons (a+b), not just the ones that are normally allowed (a).

If it was otherwise, then the rule would not say "The vehicle may not fire any of its weapons in the same turn as it used its smoke launchers," but would say something like 'The vehicle may not fire any weapons that it would normally be permitted [to fire]'.

Basically the Power of the Machine Spirit makes a distinction between the number of weapons that a vehicle would normally be permitted to fire, and the number of weapons that a vehicle would be permitted to fire with the addition of a special rule such as that one.

The Smoke Launchers rule, however, does not make this distinction. Its un-qualified use of the quantified 'any' places the scope of its use over all the weapons a vehicle might fire, rather than any subset.

Otherwise what you are actually figuring for s is s(a,b) = a+b where a(c, d, e, f) = c*(f-d?e)

d is the type of vehicle

e is the speed at which the vehicle is moving

f is the number of weapons possessed by the vehicle

But c is not in s, because s is the number of weapons that a vehicle can normally fire and not all vehicles have Smoke Launchers.

Zip Napalm:

Tzeentch existed before the material universe was hatched. Tzeentch knows the gate. Tzeentch is the gate. Tzeetch is the key and guardian of the gate. Past, present, future, all are one in Tzeentch.

The above exchange must be the best example of taking a rules discussion way waaaaay WAAAAAAY too far.

We have been around common usage of the wordings involved. We have used dictionaries to explore the more uncommon uses. And of all things, now we are trying to use mathematics to present the various points of view.

Let it go, guys.

MODS, IMHO this thread is ready to be locked. All points of view have been presented and neither side seems willing to budge.

Steelmage99:

You are aware that the point of using mathematics is to make the objects of people's points of view clear and well-defined, right?

I think this thread is going somewhere useful, and I'd like to continue the discussion. If you don't want to participate, then don't.

Once again, we have a situation in which two rules appear contradictory. "Normal" as applies to a situation is not defined in the BBB, so the argument has descended to a discussion of what can be interpreted to be normal. Many of the lines of thinking are logical and well expressed, but remain unofficial interpretations.

IMO NAVE686 and his opponent got is exactly right, roll dice to see which rule will prevail for that game and that game only.

JCarter:

Smoke Launchers and the Power of the Machine Spirit are consistent. Smoke Launchers specifically prohibits firing "any of [the vehicles] weapons in the same turn", and the Power of the Machine Spirit specifies "one more weapon than would normally be permitted."

The number of weapons that a vehicle would normally be permitted to fire is defined in the rulebook as the conjunction of its type, speed, and state of damage.

Whether a vehicle is prohibited from firing any weapons by its Smoke Launchers depends on it being part of the special group of vehicles with access to this wargear special rule.

Hence, being prohibited from firing any weapons by Smoke Launchers does not define the number of weapons that a vehicle would normally be permitted to fire.

Conversely, the Smoke Launchers prohibit firing any weapons when they are used, without any exception for weapons that are permitted to fire due to special rules that don't explicitly countermand the effect of Smoke Launchers.

The contradiction appears when we ignore how the basic rules that apply to all vehicles prior to the addition of special rules constitute what is normally permitted.

The wrong answer, wrong here defined by John Spencer in his ruling, appears when we suppose the Smoke Launchers special rule is part of what defines the number of weapons that would normally be permitted.

Naturally it is you, Nurglich, that just can't let it go.

Compensating much, hmm....

Let's stick to the topic, guys, or else the thread will have to be locked.

Please, Space Marine Land Raiders can magically shoot through the wall of smoke which obscures ALL incoming fire?

By that logic, destroyed Land Raiders get to fire one weapon per turn also. Why not? I haven't found anywhere in the books that says a destroyed Land Raider does not have functioning weapons.

Furthermore, the Land Raider which I did not field and is still in my army case would normally get 0 shots. Since it has Machine Spirit, it now gets 1. Unfortunately for you, I have six Land Raiders in that bag.

groz wrote:By that logic, destroyed Land Raiders get to fire one weapon per turn also. Why not? I haven't found anywhere in the books that says a destroyed Land Raider does not have functioning weapons.

You'll never have a destroyed Land Raider on the table.

It's either Wrecked, in which case it is now a wreck, which is treated as a piece of terrain... and there are no rules allowing terrain to fire weapons.
Or it has Exploded, in which case it has been removed from the table.

OK so we have two conditions - stunned/shaken, where the restriction is "may not shoot" and smoke launchers, where the restriction is "may not fire any of its weapons".

Since "may not shoot" is a stricter restriction than "may not fire any of its weapons", and PotMS can override the broader restriction, we can also understand this to mean that PotMS can override the narrower restriction.

Codex rules also override rulebook rules so we cannot rely on defining smoke launchers as a special rule - even if it is, the codex overrides it as occurs in every case where a codex rule and rulebook rule may conflict. In any case special rules are indicated by having the word "special" in the section title ("universal special rules"), the rule type ("mission special rules"), or the rule itself ("a special case").

Finally it is irrelevant to argue whether popping smoke is a normal condition or not. It is normal for a vehicle that has popped smoke to not be allowed to fire any weapons, since this is the rulebook consequence of popping smoke.

This will have to wait for an FAQ since the RAW can be legitimately read in conflicting ways.

Hrm. Algebraically:

F(s) = total shots
b = bolter shots
L = lascannon shots
Sm = smoke
JohnSpencer = actual answer

F(s) = (-b +/- (b^2 - 2L))2*Sm/JohnSpencer

0 = (-3 +/- (9-4))2*0/

So clearly the answer is 0.

Kilkrazy wrote:Let's stick to the topic, guys, or else the thread will have to be locked.

MARNEEZ CALGARY DOESNAHAB 2 NO RETREAT WANDS!1

CHAS SPAZ MRIEENZ R OMMG CHEEZ NEED 2 BUFFS NAOW1

Perhaps you should cut back on the sugary coffee.

Im not sure what the wording is exactly in the codexs that you all have for these rules but -

SMOKE LAUNCHERS can only be triggered at the end of MOVEMENT , the vehicle may not "fire" in the same turn as it is used.

What this means is SMOKE LAUNCHERS go AHEAD of the SHOOTING phase so any conceal and/or appropriate saves can be applied.

and as you may not "FIRE" on the same turn as it is used the PofTMS will have no shots what so ever.

Nurglitch wrote:There would be a conflict between the Power of the Machine Spirit rule and the Smoke Launchers rule if the Power of the Machine Spirit applied universally, rather than just in normal cases.

ordinarily under the circumstances that is! And under ordinary circumstances where a vehicle pops smoke it may not fire any weapons (unless there is a superceding rule found elsewhere).

Smoke launchers are a general piece of wargear which succomb to special rules. Now i am not claiming that there are classifications of wargear. But I am saying that ordinarily smoke launchers have an enumerated affect. The PotMS ordinarily allows a vehicle to fire one more weapon than would ordinarily be permitted. in this case, one weapon may fire, since ordinarily a vehicle without PotMS would not be permitted to fire any weapons.

This is the third or fourth thread to be started on this topic... it must be FAQ'd. OP please read the other threads.

So, smoke launchers abnormally restrict firing and PotMS has an effect on normal firing?

But you are mixing the phrases and losing the understanding of it.

The Machine spirit is part of the Machine itself not a separate entity so when the Machine or Vehicle cant fire the Machine Spirit cant either.

p.s. The Machine Spirit is an 'AID' to the system not a separate entity.

Something I noticed from the lumbering behemoth discussion: PotMS does not say it can fire while shaken/stunned. It says it can fire one more weapon than permitted therefor it can fire while shaken/stunned.
It doesnt seem to me that shaken/stunned is a special case of 'may not shoot' that PotMS ignores and Smoke is not.

Threadnomancy.

sakura wrote:But you are mixing the phrases and losing the understanding of it.

The Machine spirit is part of the Machine itself not a separate entity so when the Machine or Vehicle cant fire the Machine Spirit cant either.

p.s. The Machine Spirit is an 'AID' to the system not a separate entity.

Christ allmighty, you're worse than a pitbull with their jaws clamped down on a bacon-flavored toddler. What is it about this topic that you are completely unable to let go of?

Threadnomancy = bad.