Switch Theme:

Share on facebook Share on Twitter Submit to Reddit  [RSS] 

Riptide Firing Ordnance - can it move? @ 2013/07/24 15:35:21


Post by: crazyK


I may have been illegally moving my Riptide when firing Ordnance from the Nova charged Ion Accelerator. Is there any rule about Monstrous creatures firing Ordnance that allows them to move and shoot (or does Relentless allow you to move and shoot Ordnance?)? Or does it have to remain stationary per the firing ordnance rules. Also, is it limited to just firing the one weapon?


Riptide Firing Ordnance - can it move? @ 2013/07/24 15:43:08


Post by: rigeld2


Have you checked the rulebook? None of these questions have much grey area at all in the rules...


Riptide Firing Ordnance - can it move? @ 2013/07/24 15:45:58


Post by: juraigamer


Relentless covers this, yes you can do all that.


Riptide Firing Ordnance - can it move? @ 2013/07/24 15:49:18


Post by: rigeld2


If you're going to give him the rules, at least be accurate.

No, you cannot fire another weapon if you fire Ordnance, even with Relentless.


Riptide Firing Ordnance - can it move? @ 2013/07/24 16:27:53


Post by: Miri


Tau just love to have rules in conflict.


Riptide Firing Ordnance - can it move? @ 2013/07/24 16:33:59


Post by: Steel-W0LF


rigeld2 wrote:
If you're going to give him the rules, at least be accurate.

No, you cannot fire another weapon if you fire Ordnance, even with Relentless.


A Multi-Tracker say you can fire an additional weapon each turn. p-69 C:Tau


Riptide Firing Ordnance - can it move? @ 2013/07/24 16:35:03


Post by: rigeld2


 Steel-W0LF wrote:
rigeld2 wrote:
If you're going to give him the rules, at least be accurate.

No, you cannot fire another weapon if you fire Ordnance, even with Relentless.


A Multi-Tracker say you can fire an additional weapon each turn. p-69 C:Tau

And now you should read the Ordnance rules. Nothing in Multi-Tracker overrides that (that I know of - no Tau codex).


Riptide Firing Ordnance - can it move? @ 2013/07/24 16:39:09


Post by: Steel-W0LF


rigeld2 wrote:
 Steel-W0LF wrote:
rigeld2 wrote:
If you're going to give him the rules, at least be accurate.

No, you cannot fire another weapon if you fire Ordnance, even with Relentless.


A Multi-Tracker say you can fire an additional weapon each turn. p-69 C:Tau

And now you should read the Ordnance rules. Nothing in Multi-Tracker overrides that (that I know of - no Tau codex).


Codex's over rule BRB...


Riptide Firing Ordnance - can it move? @ 2013/07/24 16:43:49


Post by: Grey Templar


 Steel-W0LF wrote:
rigeld2 wrote:
 Steel-W0LF wrote:
rigeld2 wrote:
If you're going to give him the rules, at least be accurate.

No, you cannot fire another weapon if you fire Ordnance, even with Relentless.


A Multi-Tracker say you can fire an additional weapon each turn. p-69 C:Tau

And now you should read the Ordnance rules. Nothing in Multi-Tracker overrides that (that I know of - no Tau codex).


Codex's over rule BRB...


No, specific > general.

In general, a model with a multi-tracker can fire one more weapon than normally allowed.

Ordinance says you cannot fire any additional weapons. This is more specific.


Riptide Firing Ordnance - can it move? @ 2013/07/24 16:49:01


Post by: Steel-W0LF


 Grey Templar wrote:
 Steel-W0LF wrote:
rigeld2 wrote:
 Steel-W0LF wrote:
rigeld2 wrote:
If you're going to give him the rules, at least be accurate.

No, you cannot fire another weapon if you fire Ordnance, even with Relentless.


A Multi-Tracker say you can fire an additional weapon each turn. p-69 C:Tau

And now you should read the Ordnance rules. Nothing in Multi-Tracker overrides that (that I know of - no Tau codex).


Codex's over rule BRB...


No, specific > general.

In general, a model with a multi-tracker can fire one more weapon than normally allowed.

Ordinance says you cannot fire any additional weapons. This is more specific.


Page number to this ruling?


There is nothing in the Multitracker Rule that says "In general", it says "models with a multi-tracker MAY..." not might, not can sometimes....


Riptide Firing Ordnance - can it move? @ 2013/07/24 16:51:40


Post by: Grey Templar


Its not a ruling. The wording of the multi-tracker is more general than the wording of Ordinance.

Multi-tracker applies to all shooting. Ordinance applies to a very specific instance, and thus is more specific.


Riptide Firing Ordnance - can it move? @ 2013/07/24 16:59:13


Post by: Steel-W0LF


 Grey Templar wrote:
Its not a ruling. The wording of the multi-tracker is more general than the wording of Ordinance.

Multi-tracker applies to all shooting. Ordinance applies to a very specific instance, and thus is more specific.


Soooo? Whats the page number that says specific things over rule general ones?

Monstrous Creatures also have the Relentless special rule that says they can move and shoot ordinance, and charge after doing so.

So far I just see people trying to claim a codex special rule doesn't over ride a BRB rule with 0 to back it up.







Where in the rule book is this "specific rules over rule general rules" rule you keep talking about. I'd actually counter that there is a lot of evidence GW wanted them to fire 2 each turn.

MC's can already fire 2 per turn.
If fired as ordinance, it can only fire one. per the Ordinance Rules.
Multi-Tracker brings this back up to 2.

Otherwise the Multi-Tracker is redundant because a MC can already fire 2 weapons.


Riptide Firing Ordnance - can it move? @ 2013/07/24 17:01:40


Post by: Grey Templar


I'll counter by saying "what page does it say codex overrides main rule book"?


Riptide Firing Ordnance - can it move? @ 2013/07/24 17:04:39


Post by: DeathReaper


 Grey Templar wrote:
I'll counter by saying "what page does it say codex overrides main rule book"?

Actually page 7 states that, but only when there is a conflict.

"On rare occasions, a conflict will arise between a rule in this rulebook, and one printed in a codex.'Where this occurs, the rule printed in the codex always takes precedence." (7)

But the Ordnance rules give a restriction and the multi tracker does not override the Ordnance restriction.


Riptide Firing Ordnance - can it move? @ 2013/07/24 17:05:14


Post by: Steel-W0LF


Looking at it further, this is how it would work:

Number of shots per BRB-----------------------------+Tau Codex

Monstrous Creature

2.....................................................................................+1 =3

Ordinance over rules the MC rule

1......................................................................................+1 =2


Riptide Firing Ordnance - can it move? @ 2013/07/24 17:08:22


Post by: Grey Templar


Then we can use the modifier rules to sort this out.

Multi-tracker is a modifier. Ordinance is a set modifier.

MC can fire 2 weapons. +1 for multi-tracker= 3 Ordinance is a set modifier and is applied last for only 1.


Riptide Firing Ordnance - can it move? @ 2013/07/24 17:11:21


Post by: Steel-W0LF


 Grey Templar wrote:
Then we can use the modifier rules to sort this out.

Multi-tracker is a modifier. Ordinance is a set modifier.

MC can fire 2 weapons. +1 for multi-tracker= 3 Ordinance is a set modifier and is applied last for only 1.


Except for the whole page 7 thing about codex's over ruling the BRB which INCLUDES the ordinance rules...





annnnnnnd number of weapon systems something can fire is not part of the stat line modifiers.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Its OK though, I often mix things in from previous editions that are no longer in 6th edition.


Riptide Firing Ordnance - can it move? @ 2013/07/24 17:26:18


Post by: rigeld2


Page 7 overrides when there's a conflict.
There's no conflict here. This isn't a leftover from an old edition, this is how rules currently exist.


Riptide Firing Ordnance - can it move? @ 2013/07/24 17:28:52


Post by: Miri


Sure there is a conflict. Monstrous Creature rules and Multi Tracker rules says that the model can fire 2 weapons or an additional weapon which conflicts with the Ordinance rules that says no other weapons.


Riptide Firing Ordnance - can it move? @ 2013/07/24 17:37:55


Post by: rigeld2


 Miri wrote:
Sure there is a conflict. Monstrous Creature rules and Multi Tracker rules says that the model can fire 2 weapons or an additional weapon which conflicts with the Ordinance rules that says no other weapons.

That's not a conflict.
A conflict is when you have a rule like "Snap Shot" that says it cannot ever be modified.
Tau marker lights specify they can modify a Snap Shot. This is when page 7 comes into play.


Riptide Firing Ordnance - can it move? @ 2013/07/24 18:49:09


Post by: Steel-W0LF


Ordinance rule says only one weapon.

Tau codex says one additional.

That's a conflict.

The codex wins.



End of story. Arguing otherwise negates all kinds of "codex trumps.." rulings. It just doesn't float.


Riptide Firing Ordnance - can it move? @ 2013/07/24 18:53:49


Post by: jdjamesdean@mail.com


 Steel-W0LF wrote:
Ordinance rule says only one weapon.

Tau codex says one additional.

That's a conflict.

The codex wins.



End of story. Arguing otherwise negates all kinds of "codex trumps.." rulings. It just doesn't float.


There's no direct conflict, so we never go to Codex>BRB.

As it stands it only fires 1 whilst firing ord.


Riptide Firing Ordnance - can it move? @ 2013/07/24 19:17:14


Post by: Steel-W0LF


jdjamesdean@mail.com wrote:
 Steel-W0LF wrote:
Ordinance rule says only one weapon.

Tau codex says one additional.

That's a conflict.

The codex wins.



End of story. Arguing otherwise negates all kinds of "codex trumps.." rulings. It just doesn't float.


There's no direct conflict, so we never go to Codex>BRB.

As it stands it only fires 1 whilst firing ord.


And the codex says they fire 1 additional.

Codex wins. Counter the argument with something from the codex, or lose the debate. The BRB does not over rule a codex rule stating an additional weapon may be fired.


Riptide Firing Ordnance - can it move? @ 2013/07/24 19:29:44


Post by: nosferatu1001


except the codex does not say "even when firing ordnance", so is not more specific, and does not win over the rulebook


Riptide Firing Ordnance - can it move? @ 2013/07/24 19:29:46


Post by: rigeld2


It actually does and you're not understanding how rules work.

How about - maybe - cite the conflict. You've failed to so far.


Riptide Firing Ordnance - can it move? @ 2013/07/24 19:32:49


Post by: Tactical_Genius


 Steel-W0LF wrote:
jdjamesdean@mail.com wrote:
 Steel-W0LF wrote:
Ordinance rule says only one weapon.

Tau codex says one additional.

That's a conflict.

The codex wins.



End of story. Arguing otherwise negates all kinds of "codex trumps.." rulings. It just doesn't float.


There's no direct conflict, so we never go to Codex>BRB.

As it stands it only fires 1 whilst firing ord.


And the codex says they fire 1 additional.

Codex wins. Counter the argument with something from the codex, or lose the debate. The BRB does not over rule a codex rule stating an additional weapon may be fired.


Multiple Modifiers.
Let's call the number of weapons allowed to fire N.

A riptide is an MC, so N = 2

Multitracker provides +1 weapon so
N = (2+1)

Set modifier from ordnance is one weapon so...
N = ((2+1) * 0) + 1
or N = 1


Riptide Firing Ordnance - can it move? @ 2013/07/24 19:35:51


Post by: Steel-W0LF


Tactical_Genius wrote:
 Steel-W0LF wrote:
jdjamesdean@mail.com wrote:
 Steel-W0LF wrote:
Ordinance rule says only one weapon.

Tau codex says one additional.

That's a conflict.

The codex wins.



End of story. Arguing otherwise negates all kinds of "codex trumps.." rulings. It just doesn't float.


There's no direct conflict, so we never go to Codex>BRB.

As it stands it only fires 1 whilst firing ord.


And the codex says they fire 1 additional.

Codex wins. Counter the argument with something from the codex, or lose the debate. The BRB does not over rule a codex rule stating an additional weapon may be fired.




Multiple Modifiers.
Let's call the number of weapons allowed to fire N.

A riptide is an MC, so N = 2

Multitracker provides +1 weapon so
N = (2+1)

Set modifier from ordnance is one weapon so...
N = ((2+1) * 0) + 1
or N = 1


You're trying to apply statline modifier rules to rules that are not statline modifiers.

Try again.


Riptide Firing Ordnance - can it move? @ 2013/07/24 19:39:03


Post by: Tactical_Genius


OK point conceded, but you haven't answered the most important questions: the ones posed by nos and rig.


Riptide Firing Ordnance - can it move? @ 2013/07/24 19:59:47


Post by: Miri


Multi Trackers don't say "even when firing an enplaced weapon" yet it is accepted that a suit can fire a Quadgun on a Bastion and one of its own weapons. I don't know if there are any Marine vehicles with Ordnance weapons but Power of the Machine Spirit doesn't say anything about "even when firing ordnance", it simply says it "can fire one more weapon at its full Ballistic Skill than normally permitted."

The rules are not written with every exception in mind, it would be impossible to read them much less play them if they tried to do that. It is why they have such rules as "Codex trumps base" to resolve the issue.


Riptide Firing Ordnance - can it move? @ 2013/07/24 20:01:16


Post by: easysauce


its just like shooting missles from a storm raven,

yes Power of the machine spirit lets you fire one additional WEAPON,

but you cannot fire more then 2 missles still, because the specific missle rule is 2 per turn

some things like missles/ordanence has specific restrictions on how they affect # of weapons to be fired, specific permission to overide these limitations is needed, having a general bonus +1 to generic weapons fired in no way overides specific rules RE: missles/ordinance


Riptide Firing Ordnance - can it move? @ 2013/07/24 20:07:05


Post by: rigeld2


 Miri wrote:
Multi Trackers don't say "even when firing an enplaced weapon" yet it is accepted that a suit can fire a Quadgun on a Bastion and one of its own weapons. I don't know if there are any Marine vehicles with Ordnance weapons but Power of the Machine Spirit doesn't say anything about "even when firing ordnance", it simply says it "can fire one more weapon at its full Ballistic Skill than normally permitted."

Reading the rules for emplaced weapons shows us that the multi-tracker would allow you to fire it as a second weapon.
PotMS doesn't allow you to fire a weapon in addition to an Ordnance weapon, just like it doesn't allow a third missile in a turn.

The rules are not written with every exception in mind, it would be impossible to read them much less play them if they tried to do that. It is why they have such rules as "Codex trumps base" to resolve the issue.

Not really, but go ahead and keep pushing that false statement around.


Riptide Firing Ordnance - can it move? @ 2013/07/24 20:08:57


Post by: Steel-W0LF


 easysauce wrote:
its just like shooting missles from a storm raven,

yes Power of the machine spirit lets you fire one additional WEAPON,

but you cannot fire more then 2 missles still, because the specific missle rule is 2 per turn

some things like missles/ordanence has specific restrictions on how they affect # of weapons to be fired, specific permission to overide these limitations is needed, having a general bonus +1 to generic weapons fired in no way overides specific rules RE: missles/ordinance


Ordinance has a special restriction of "cannot assault" after firing. Yet the BRB over rules itself with monsterous creatures being able to assault after firing.

You go to the highest rule set, and those are in the codex.

The codex rules. And the codex says "+1"


Riptide Firing Ordnance - can it move? @ 2013/07/24 20:14:47


Post by: DeathReaper


 Steel-W0LF wrote:
You go to the highest rule set, and those are in the codex.

The codex rules. And the codex says "+1"


That is really not how a permissive ruleset works...

More specific rules will trump general rules.


Riptide Firing Ordnance - can it move? @ 2013/07/24 20:15:31


Post by: rigeld2


 Steel-W0LF wrote:
Ordinance has a special restriction of "cannot assault" after firing. Yet the BRB over rules itself with monsterous creatures being able to assault after firing.

Ordnance creates a restriction. Relentless says you can assault even after firing Ordnance. This crates a conflict which we resolve with specific > general (not a written rule, but a concept that must exist for a permissive rules set to work).

Note how Relentless specifies Ordnance.
Note how multi-trackers does nothing of the sort.

No specification, no conflict.


Riptide Firing Ordnance - can it move? @ 2013/07/24 20:20:00


Post by: Steel-W0LF


rigeld2 wrote:
 Steel-W0LF wrote:
Ordinance has a special restriction of "cannot assault" after firing. Yet the BRB over rules itself with monsterous creatures being able to assault after firing.

Ordnance creates a restriction. Relentless says you can assault even after firing Ordnance. This crates a conflict which we resolve with specific > general (not a written rule, but a concept that must exist for a permissive rules set to work).

Note how Relentless specifies Ordnance.
Note how multi-trackers does nothing of the sort.

No specification, no conflict.


Ok. Now explain why Power of the Machine Spirit allows you to fire additional weapons when firing ordinance.


Riptide Firing Ordnance - can it move? @ 2013/07/24 20:21:53


Post by: rigeld2


 Steel-W0LF wrote:
rigeld2 wrote:
 Steel-W0LF wrote:
Ordinance has a special restriction of "cannot assault" after firing. Yet the BRB over rules itself with monsterous creatures being able to assault after firing.

Ordnance creates a restriction. Relentless says you can assault even after firing Ordnance. This crates a conflict which we resolve with specific > general (not a written rule, but a concept that must exist for a permissive rules set to work).

Note how Relentless specifies Ordnance.
Note how multi-trackers does nothing of the sort.

No specification, no conflict.


Ok. Now explain why Power of the Machine Spirit allows you to fire additional weapons when firing ordinance.

It doesn't?

Did I say that it did?
Edit: Vehicles allow you to fire other weapons as Snap Shots when you fire Ordnance - perhaps that's what confused you?


Riptide Firing Ordnance - can it move? @ 2013/07/24 20:24:48


Post by: rogueeyes


A model with a multitracker and ordnance is more specific then a model with an ordnance weapon. This creates a conflict. The model with ordnance and multitracker is more specific.

Multitrackers are extra rules thus making it more specific since you are adding additional rules onto a generalized rule that exists. Multitrackers are also codex specific which overrides rulebook rules.

Codex > rulebook
Specific > general

Model with ordnance and multitracker is more specific then model with ordnance weapon.

Therefore riptide can fire 2 weapons when it fires ordnance because of the multitracker.

Set modifiers would override the mc rule but not the multitracker rule because of the multitracker being codex specific rule that overrides the main rule book allowing for an extra shot. The direct conflict is the number of shots allowed.

Mc is 2
Set modifier overrides to 1
Multitracker is specific codex allowing +1
Total is 2


Riptide Firing Ordnance - can it move? @ 2013/07/24 20:26:31


Post by: rigeld2


Absolutely wrong on all counts.
A) there's no conflict.
B) you're misapplying the actual rules to how modifiers are applied. An addition never comes after a set modifier.


Riptide Firing Ordnance - can it move? @ 2013/07/24 20:28:37


Post by: Steel-W0LF


rigeld2 wrote:
Absolutely wrong on all counts.
A) there's no conflict.
B) you're misapplying the actual rules to how modifiers are applied. An addition never comes after a set modifier.


If there was no conflict. We wouldn't be debating.

We are debating. Hence there is a conflict.

Codex trumps. It can fire both.


Riptide Firing Ordnance - can it move? @ 2013/07/24 20:30:35


Post by: rigeld2


So... No rules citation?
You have to have an instance like Ordnance and Relentless to have a conflict.


Riptide Firing Ordnance - can it move? @ 2013/07/24 20:30:55


Post by: Steel-W0LF


rigeld2 wrote:
 Steel-W0LF wrote:
rigeld2 wrote:
 Steel-W0LF wrote:
Ordinance has a special restriction of "cannot assault" after firing. Yet the BRB over rules itself with monsterous creatures being able to assault after firing.

Ordnance creates a restriction. Relentless says you can assault even after firing Ordnance. This crates a conflict which we resolve with specific > general (not a written rule, but a concept that must exist for a permissive rules set to work).

Note how Relentless specifies Ordnance.
Note how multi-trackers does nothing of the sort.

No specification, no conflict.


Ok. Now explain why Power of the Machine Spirit allows you to fire additional weapons when firing ordinance.

It doesn't?

Did I say that it did?
Edit: Vehicles allow you to fire other weapons as Snap Shots when you fire Ordnance - perhaps that's what confused you?


Ahhh. So vehicles that have special rules saying they can fire more = "ok"
And Tau having special rules saying they can fire more = "not ok"

Perfect consistency there.


Riptide Firing Ordnance - can it move? @ 2013/07/24 20:31:27


Post by: Miri


rigeld2 wrote:
Absolutely wrong on all counts.
A) there's no conflict.
B) you're misapplying the actual rules to how modifiers are applied. An addition never comes after a set modifier.


Never mind the fact that you can't apply the statline modifiers rule to something that isn't a stat line.

As for the conflict. One rule says I can only fire 1 weapon (ordinance) and another rule says I can fire one additional weapon without limitations as to the type of weapon that can be fired. How can you possibly claim there is no conflict there?


Riptide Firing Ordnance - can it move? @ 2013/07/24 20:31:44


Post by: rigeld2


 Steel-W0LF wrote:
rigeld2 wrote:
 Steel-W0LF wrote:
rigeld2 wrote:
 Steel-W0LF wrote:
Ordinance has a special restriction of "cannot assault" after firing. Yet the BRB over rules itself with monsterous creatures being able to assault after firing.

Ordnance creates a restriction. Relentless says you can assault even after firing Ordnance. This crates a conflict which we resolve with specific > general (not a written rule, but a concept that must exist for a permissive rules set to work).

Note how Relentless specifies Ordnance.
Note how multi-trackers does nothing of the sort.

No specification, no conflict.


Ok. Now explain why Power of the Machine Spirit allows you to fire additional weapons when firing ordinance.

It doesn't?

Did I say that it did?
Edit: Vehicles allow you to fire other weapons as Snap Shots when you fire Ordnance - perhaps that's what confused you?


Ahhh. So vehicles that have special rules saying they can fire more = "ok"
And Tau having special rules saying they can fire more = "not ok"

Perfect consistency there.

Yes. One explicitly talks about Ordnance, one doesn't.
See the difference?


Riptide Firing Ordnance - can it move? @ 2013/07/24 20:33:17


Post by: Quark


 Steel-W0LF wrote:

Ahhh. So vehicles that have special rules saying they can fire more = "ok"
And Tau having special rules saying they can fire more = "not ok"

Perfect consistency there.


Stop ignoring words. Vehicles have a specific mention for Ordnance that they can fire other weapons as Snapshots. In fact, the Ordnance rule itself only restricts non-vehicles from firing multiple weapons.

Relentless allows you to fire, specifically, Ordnance after moving. Multi-Tracker never specifically calls out Ordnance.


Riptide Firing Ordnance - can it move? @ 2013/07/24 20:34:04


Post by: rigeld2


 Miri wrote:
rigeld2 wrote:
Absolutely wrong on all counts.
A) there's no conflict.
B) you're misapplying the actual rules to how modifiers are applied. An addition never comes after a set modifier.


Never mind the fact that you can't apply the statline modifiers rule to something that isn't a stat line.

As for the conflict. One rule says I can only fire 1 weapon (ordinance) and another rule says I can fire one additional weapon without limitations as to the type of weapon that can be fired. How can you possibly claim there is no conflict there?

Because nothing is telling you to ignore the Ordnance rule.

Reference Relentless.
Reference Vehicles and Ordnance.
Those are conflicts. Multi-tracker is not.


Riptide Firing Ordnance - can it move? @ 2013/07/24 20:50:53


Post by: Steel-W0LF


rigeld2 wrote:
 Miri wrote:
rigeld2 wrote:
Absolutely wrong on all counts.
A) there's no conflict.
B) you're misapplying the actual rules to how modifiers are applied. An addition never comes after a set modifier.


Never mind the fact that you can't apply the statline modifiers rule to something that isn't a stat line.

As for the conflict. One rule says I can only fire 1 weapon (ordinance) and another rule says I can fire one additional weapon without limitations as to the type of weapon that can be fired. How can you possibly claim there is no conflict there?

Because nothing is telling you to ignore the Ordnance rule.

Reference Relentless.
Reference Vehicles and Ordnance.
Those are conflicts. Multi-tracker is not.

And nothing is telling you you can ignore the higher codex rule.

The codex rule is unrestricted. It trumps. Nothing changes that.


Riptide Firing Ordnance - can it move? @ 2013/07/24 20:51:48


Post by: rigeld2


It trumps if there's a conflict.
You've still failed to demonstrate one.


Riptide Firing Ordnance - can it move? @ 2013/07/24 20:58:17


Post by: jcress410


I tend to agree with the side of this thread arguing specific > general, so ordinance restriction overrides the benefit from the tracker


I don't know how I'd explain / defend this interpretation if I were actually playing a game though. If someone insisted they could fire a second weapon, absent a ruling from a TO, I think I'd have to dice it off or something.


Riptide Firing Ordnance - can it move? @ 2013/07/24 21:01:39


Post by: agnosto


My personal opinion is based on a bastardized form of the mathematical concept of orders of operation.

In my mind, the rule book is a list of general instructions as it is per force involved in all of the mechanics of the game.

The codex is a smaller, more focused set of rules that are specific to the army.

Based upon this, I apply all rules from the rulebook and then any applicable rules from the codex.

Here's how my thought process works:
The rulebook states that only one weapon may be fired. The codex states that an additional weapon may be fired for models that possess a certain piece of wargear.

The rulebook states that MCs may fire two weapons.
The rulebook states that firing an ordnance weapon reduces this number to one.

As an MC, the model may fire two weapons but chooses to fire an ordnance weapon. This action reduces the number of potential shots to one as per another rule in the rulebook related to ordnance.

Once all the general rules are applied from the rulebook, I check to see if there are any codex-specific rules that apply. There is a rule in the codex that allows me to fire an additional weapon; I apply this rule and am now able to fire 1 weapon in addition to the ordnance weapon.

To me, there is no conflict, there is only the order in which rules are applied. I don't view the body of all rules as one pooled whole but as separate, contributing bodies that add content.

Obviously there are those here that would disagree with how I view the rules but that's my 2 cents and the world will keep spinning. The good news is that I never play competitively so you need never worry about my view of the world causing your blood pressure to rise.

Cheers.


Riptide Firing Ordnance - can it move? @ 2013/07/24 21:04:33


Post by: Savageconvoy


I have to side with the Ordnance +1 on this.
Ordnance says you can only fire an Ordnance weapon, but the multi-tracker affect still applies to allow you to fire an additional weapon. It doesn't specifically say it doesn't apply for Ordnance weapons and it's giving you permission to fire one extra weapon on top of what you're allowed to fire.


Riptide Firing Ordnance - can it move? @ 2013/07/24 21:17:56


Post by: Fragile


 Savageconvoy wrote:
I have to side with the Ordnance +1 on this.
Ordnance says you can only fire an Ordnance weapon, but the multi-tracker affect still applies to allow you to fire an additional weapon. It doesn't specifically say it doesn't apply for Ordnance weapons and it's giving you permission to fire one extra weapon on top of what you're allowed to fire.


Multitracker gives you the ability to fire an additional weapon. There is no issue here. You could have the ability to fire twenty weapons, but as soon as you fire an Ordnance weapon, you cannot fire any others. Ordnance is not a quantity of weapons you can fire but a restriction on firing other weapons. Ordnance is more specific because it mentions the firing of other weapons as an exclusion.


Riptide Firing Ordnance - can it move? @ 2013/07/24 21:31:04


Post by: Savageconvoy


Fragile wrote:

Multitracker gives you the ability to fire an additional weapon. There is no issue here. You could have the ability to fire twenty weapons, but as soon as you fire an Ordnance weapon, you cannot fire any others. Ordnance is not a quantity of weapons you can fire but a restriction on firing other weapons. Ordnance is more specific because it mentions the firing of other weapons as an exclusion.
That's not the way I'm reading it.
You're allowed to fire X weapons normally. Multi-tracker allows you to fire one more, regardless of what X is.
When firing Ordnance X=1, but Multi-tracker still has the effect you're allowed to fire one additional weapon.
So in this case two total.


Riptide Firing Ordnance - can it move? @ 2013/07/24 21:34:03


Post by: Steel-W0LF


Fragile wrote:
 Savageconvoy wrote:
I have to side with the Ordnance +1 on this.
Ordnance says you can only fire an Ordnance weapon, but the multi-tracker affect still applies to allow you to fire an additional weapon. It doesn't specifically say it doesn't apply for Ordnance weapons and it's giving you permission to fire one extra weapon on top of what you're allowed to fire.


Multitracker gives you the ability to fire an additional weapon. There is no issue here. You could have the ability to fire twenty weapons, but as soon as you fire an Ordnance weapon, you cannot fire any others. Ordnance is not a quantity of weapons you can fire but a restriction on firing other weapons. Ordnance is more specific because it mentions the firing of other weapons as an exclusion.


But the BRB does not ever over rule a codex.

The poster above who described figuring out how many shots the BRB allows you to shoot, then going to the codex for modifiers is exactly right. One additional weapon has no modifiers to it. Meaning a model with that rule can ALWAYS fire one more weapon than the BRB would allow.

BRB allows MCs 2.
Ordinance changes this to 1
Tau codex modifies this to 2

If this was not the case. What is the point of the multi tracker on the Riptide? It's only got two weapon systems, and can already fire both for being a monsterous creature.


Riptide Firing Ordnance - can it move? @ 2013/07/24 21:51:23


Post by: hyv3mynd


I think you guys are looking at this from the wrong view.

Multi-tracker allows the model to fire +1 weapon.
PoTMS allows the vehicle to fire +1 weapon at full bs.

Using smoke launchers or going flat out prohibits shooting.
Using ordnance prohibits the MC from firing other weapons.

PoTMS cannot be used to circumvent the restriction on shooting after using smoke launchers or moving flat out.

By this precedence, multi-trackers cannot be used to circumvent the restriction on shooting in addition to ordnance.

You don't need permission to fire an additional weapon after firing ordnance, you need permission to fire anything period, which multi-trackers do not provide just like PoTMS.


Riptide Firing Ordnance - can it move? @ 2013/07/24 21:54:07


Post by: Ghaz


The rule that tells you how many weapons you can fire and the rules that say you can't fire another weapon if you fire an ordnance weapon are two separate rules. Relentless only affects the first rule. It has absolutely no affect on the second rule.


Riptide Firing Ordnance - can it move? @ 2013/07/24 21:58:05


Post by: Happyjew


 Steel-W0LF wrote:
But the BRB does not ever over rule a codex.


Yes it does. There are numerous instances where the BRB over rules a codex.

For example:
Q: There is no Black Templars vehicles reference section at the back of
the rulebook. Does this mean I should use the Codex: Space Marines
vehicle reference section instead (meaning my Venerable Dreadnoughts
are now Weapon Skill and Ballistic Skill 5, for example)?
A: Yes


If codex always overrules the BRB, then the Venerable Dreads would not be WS5, BS5.


Riptide Firing Ordnance - can it move? @ 2013/07/24 22:00:56


Post by: copper.talos


 Steel-W0LF wrote:

But the BRB does not ever over rule a codex.


You are wrong on this. BRB "over rules" a codex whenever is appropriate ie a model can never make more than 1 attack in melee using a grenade. No matter how many attack bonuses a codex may give a model, when using grenades it can attack only once. Specific > general. The only way to by pass this restriction would be if the bonus was worded like "the model gets +1A even when using grenades". So again it would be specific > general.

The way ordnance and multitracker are worded, makes ordnance more specific so you can't use multitracker to fire 1 more weapon.


Riptide Firing Ordnance - can it move? @ 2013/07/24 22:07:46


Post by: Steel-W0LF


 Happyjew wrote:
 Steel-W0LF wrote:
But the BRB does not ever over rule a codex.


Yes it does. There are numerous instances where the BRB over rules a codex.

For example:
Q: There is no Black Templars vehicles reference section at the back of
the rulebook. Does this mean I should use the Codex: Space Marines
vehicle reference section instead (meaning my Venerable Dreadnoughts
are now Weapon Skill and Ballistic Skill 5, for example)?
A: Yes


If codex always overrules the BRB, then the Venerable Dreads would not be WS5, BS5.


No.


A FAQ over ruled it.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
copper.talos wrote:
 Steel-W0LF wrote:

But the BRB does not ever over rule a codex.


You are wrong on this. BRB "over rules" a codex whenever is appropriate ie a model can never make more than 1 attack in melee using a grenade. No matter how many attack bonuses a codex may give a model, when using grenades it can attack only once. Specific > general. The only way to by pass this restriction would be if the bonus was worded like "the model gets +1A even when using grenades". So again it would be specific > general.

The way ordnance and multitracker are worded, makes ordnance more specific so you can't use multitracker to fire 1 more weapon.


Except the grenade rule is NOT a codex rule. It's a BRB rule over riding another BRB rule.

A codex rule is only trumped by a FAQ ruling like the pervious poster erroneously tried to point to.


Riptide Firing Ordnance - can it move? @ 2013/07/24 22:15:06


Post by: copper.talos


Grenades in melee is a BRB rule, bonus attacks are given by codices rules. Yet grenade rule applies over any bonus attacks in melee given by any codex. Same thing with ordnance and multitracker.


Riptide Firing Ordnance - can it move? @ 2013/07/24 22:18:09


Post by: Evil Lamp 6


Steel, and others agreeing with Ordinance +1, read this. Then come back and apply what you learn from Yak's post to this discussion to see why your position on this issue is incorrect. Thank you.


Riptide Firing Ordnance - can it move? @ 2013/07/24 22:27:33


Post by: Fragile


 Savageconvoy wrote:
That's not the way I'm reading it.
You're allowed to fire X weapons normally. Multi-tracker allows you to fire one more, regardless of what X is.
When firing Ordnance X=1, but Multi-tracker still has the effect you're allowed to fire one additional weapon.
So in this case two total.


One additional weapon each shooting phase does not override the cannot fire "other weapons"

Ordnance is more specific, as it mentions the ability to fire other weapons (which would include any additional weapons granted by the MT.)


Riptide Firing Ordnance - can it move? @ 2013/07/24 22:31:47


Post by: Elric Greywolf


An MC has "normal shooting" of 2 weapons. The Multi Tracker lets a model fire one more than "normal."
Firing Ordnance is not "normal" since it has some very specific restrictions attached to it.
Thus, the Multi Tracker's "one more than normal" doesn't apply to the Riptide, since Riptide, by using ordnance, isn't firing normally.


Riptide Firing Ordnance - can it move? @ 2013/07/24 23:18:41


Post by: Steel-W0LF


Multi Tracker lets you for one additional weapon system.

One in addition to what?

The BRB is what tells you how many to fire. In the case of Ordinance thats 1.

One in addition to one is 2.... Until a FAQ comes on that states otherwise.


Riptide Firing Ordnance - can it move? @ 2013/07/24 23:22:51


Post by: Happyjew


 Evil Lamp 6 wrote:
Steel, and others agreeing with Ordinance +1, read this. Then come back and apply what you learn from Yak's post to this discussion to see why your position on this issue is incorrect. Thank you.


Steel-WOLF, did you read the linked post? If so, you should understand why you do not have permission.

Oh, and it is Ordnance (no "i").


Riptide Firing Ordnance - can it move? @ 2013/07/24 23:32:10


Post by: Fragile


 Steel-W0LF wrote:
Multi Tracker lets you for one additional weapon system.

One in addition to what?

The BRB is what tells you how many to fire. In the case of Ordinance thats 1.

One in addition to one is 2.... Until a FAQ comes on that states otherwise.


And an MC can fire an additional weapon in the shooting phase, but that doesnt matter with Ordnance.

Ordnance does not say you can only fire 1 weapon per turn, it says you cannot fire any weapons after you fire Ordnance. A subtle but important difference.


Riptide Firing Ordnance - can it move? @ 2013/07/24 23:35:01


Post by: Savageconvoy


The link actually makes me think more strongly in the case of Ordnance +1.

What gives permission to fire one extra? Multi-tracker.
Is there a restriction on the one extra weapon? None given.
Why should we assume there is a restriction? Because a general weapon type.
Which is more specific to the case in point, weapon type or codex wargear? Codex wargear.


Riptide Firing Ordnance - can it move? @ 2013/07/24 23:35:54


Post by: Steel-W0LF


Fragile wrote:
 Steel-W0LF wrote:
Multi Tracker lets you for one additional weapon system.

One in addition to what?

The BRB is what tells you how many to fire. In the case of Ordinance thats 1.

One in addition to one is 2.... Until a FAQ comes on that states otherwise.


And an MC can fire an additional weapon in the shooting phase, but that doesnt matter with Ordnance.

Ordnance does not say you can only fire 1 weapon per turn, it says you cannot fire any weapons after you fire Ordnance. A subtle but important difference.

Which is trumped by war gear in a codex.

I'll ask again. What is the point of a multi tracker on a riptide if I am wrong. If I am wrong what does it do?


Riptide Firing Ordnance - can it move? @ 2013/07/24 23:40:44


Post by: Happyjew


 Steel-W0LF wrote:
I'll ask again. What is the point of a multi tracker on a riptide if I am wrong. If I am wrong what does it do?


It does nothing. Just like giving the Avatar of Khaine (who has a 12" range weapon) the ability to take NIght Fighting.


Riptide Firing Ordnance - can it move? @ 2013/07/24 23:46:56


Post by: Steel-W0LF


 Happyjew wrote:
 Steel-W0LF wrote:
I'll ask again. What is the point of a multi tracker on a riptide if I am wrong. If I am wrong what does it do?


It does nothing. Just like giving the Avatar of Khaine (who has a 12" range weapon) the ability to take NIght Fighting.


This is not a redundant piece of war gear that is optional.

It's given to the unit.


Riptide Firing Ordnance - can it move? @ 2013/07/24 23:50:10


Post by: Fragile


 Steel-W0LF wrote:
Fragile wrote:
 Steel-W0LF wrote:
Multi Tracker lets you for one additional weapon system.

One in addition to what?

The BRB is what tells you how many to fire. In the case of Ordinance thats 1.

One in addition to one is 2.... Until a FAQ comes on that states otherwise.


And an MC can fire an additional weapon in the shooting phase, but that doesnt matter with Ordnance.

Ordnance does not say you can only fire 1 weapon per turn, it says you cannot fire any weapons after you fire Ordnance. A subtle but important difference.

Which is trumped by war gear in a codex.

I'll ask again. What is the point of a multi tracker on a riptide if I am wrong. If I am wrong what does it do?


It isnt trumped because it is not the same thing. The MT allows the Riptide to fire 3 weapons in the shooting phase. Ordnance says that if any weapon with Ordnance is fire, that model cannot fire any other weapon. Nothing removed the ability of the Riptide to fire 3 weapons, but by choosing to fire Ordnance, you limited yourself to 1 for that phase.





Riptide Firing Ordnance - can it move? @ 2013/07/24 23:59:42


Post by: Dracos


I think the lack of quotes of the relevant rules is really hurting this debate. I was thinking the multitracker would work until I read the ordinance rules.

p.51 "[...] the model cannot fire other weapons that phase"

Ordinance does not change the number of weapons a models is permitted to fire. However, when firing an ordinance weapon [as a non-vehicle] you are restricted from firing any other weapon that turn.

This has no direct interaction with the general number of weapons per phase a model may fire.

A model with a multitracker can fire 2 weapons per turn. However, a model with a multitracker who is firing an ordinance weapon that turn may not fire any other weapon[s].


Riptide Firing Ordnance - can it move? @ 2013/07/25 00:30:38


Post by: Steel-W0LF


 Dracos wrote:
I think the lack of quotes of the relevant rules is really hurting this debate. I was thinking the multitracker would work until I read the ordinance rules.

p.51 "[...] the model cannot fire other weapons that phase"

Ordinance does not change the number of weapons a models is permitted to fire. However, when firing an ordinance weapon [as a non-vehicle] you are restricted from firing any other weapon that turn.

This has no direct interaction with the general number of weapons per phase a model may fire.

A model with a multitracker can fire 2 weapons per turn. However, a model with a multitracker who is firing an ordinance weapon that turn may not fire any other weapon[s].


Says the BRB. When the codex says it can fire one additional.

And to the poster above saying the riptide can fire 3 weapons: that true. But it only carries 2 weapon systems. So why give it a multi tracker if it does not modify the ordinance number.


Riptide Firing Ordnance - can it move? @ 2013/07/25 00:43:06


Post by: hyv3mynd


Why doesn't matter. Why give the avatar night fighting? Why give jetbikes battle focus? The game is full of redundant rules.

Firing one additional weapon doesn't override the ban on firing at all. Just like PotMS doesn't override the ban on firing after using smoke launchers or going flat out.


Riptide Firing Ordnance - can it move? @ 2013/07/25 01:00:14


Post by: Steel-W0LF


 hyv3mynd wrote:
Why doesn't matter. Why give the avatar night fighting? Why give jetbikes battle focus? The game is full of redundant rules.

Firing one additional weapon doesn't override the ban on firing at all. Just like PotMS doesn't override the ban on firing after using smoke launchers or going flat out.


Well until a FAQ rules otherwise, you can't back that up in the rule book. You can play it like you want in your games though.


Riptide Firing Ordnance - can it move? @ 2013/07/25 01:05:37


Post by: Mr. Shine


Lets have some rules quotes.

BRB, pg. 51 wrote:Furthermore, if a non-vehicle model fires an Ordnance weapon, then the massive recoil from the Ordnance weapon means the model cannot fire other weapons that phase.

Codex: Tau, pg. 69 wrote:A model with a multi-tracker can fire an additional weapon in each Shooting phase.

BRB, pg. 7 wrote:On rare occasions, a conflict will arise between a rule in this rulebook, and one printed in a codex. When this occurs, the rule printed in the codex always takes precedence.


The ordnance rule of "cannot fire other" reduces the weapons a model may fire to only the ordnance weapon, however this conflicts with a Multi-tracker's ability to allow an additional weapon to be fired, thus Codex: Tau takes precedence as per the rulebook.

This does make me lean towards ordnance plus one weapon.


Riptide Firing Ordnance - can it move? @ 2013/07/25 01:15:57


Post by: Happyjew


If the Multi-tracker said
A model with a multi-tracker can fire an additional weapon in each Shooting phase, even if it fired an Ordnance weapon

then there would be a conflict in which the codex wins.
However,
 yakface wrote:
3) Specific overrides general, although remembering that restrictions still override permissions.


Its very simple, when two rules contradict each other, the one that is more specific must take precedence. When GW talks about advanced rules taking precedence over basic rules, this simply means something like: the basic rules for movement say that models move 6" in the movement phase. But then in the advanced rules they'll say stuff like: 'models using a jump pack in the movement phase move 12 inches'.

If the advanced rules didn't take precedence over the basic rules, then all models would move 6 inches in the movement phase, as advanced rules would be unable to override this basic tenant no matter what. In other words, 'advanced' really just means 'specific', while 'basic' really just means 'general'.

However, this does not mean that advanced rules always override basic rules, as restrictions still take precedence over permissions. For example, an advanced rule may say: 'models with jump packs are able to move 12" in the movement phase', but if a model has gone to ground, then the basic rules restriction against a model being able to move in the movement phase still overrides the advanced rules permission that the model can move 12" in the movement phase.

It is also even possible for a 'basic' rule to be specific enough to override an 'advanced' rule. For example, an advanced rule may say that jump pack models can move 12" in the movement phase, but if there happened to be a 'basic' rule which actually spelled out that jump pack models can only move 6" when moving into difficult terrain (just an imaginary example here), then that 'basic' rule would still take precedence over the 'advanced' rule because it was specific enough to actually mention that it applies to jump pack models.

Finally, when GW says that codexes take precedence over the rulebook, again this is a case of generally speaking, the codexes being more 'advanced' than the advanced rules in the rulebook. Meaning, if the advanced rules in the rulebook say that Jump Pack models move 12" in the movement phase but a codex says that a special unit moves like a Jump Pack model, but up to 18", then clearly the codex rule has to take precedence over the rulebook for the whole thing to work.

But just as before, restrictions still override permissions (even if the restriction is in the rulebook and the permission is in a codex) and it is possible for rules in the rulebook to be more specific than even a codex and therefore take precedence over the codex rules.


So please, please, please do not parrot the terms: 'codex > rulebook' and 'advanced > basic' without understanding that these concepts are not absolute. They ONLY apply when the rules between two sources actually contradict, not when one is a permission and the other is a restriction.


Riptide Firing Ordnance - can it move? @ 2013/07/25 01:24:35


Post by: Steel-W0LF


 Happyjew wrote:
If the Multi-tracker said
A model with a multi-tracker can fire an additional weapon in each Shooting phase, even if it fired an Ordnance weapon

then there would be a conflict in which the codex wins.
However,
 yakface wrote:
3) Specific overrides general, although remembering that restrictions still override permissions.


Its very simple, when two rules contradict each other, the one that is more specific must take precedence. When GW talks about advanced rules taking precedence over basic rules, this simply means something like: the basic rules for movement say that models move 6" in the movement phase. But then in the advanced rules they'll say stuff like: 'models using a jump pack in the movement phase move 12 inches'.

If the advanced rules didn't take precedence over the basic rules, then all models would move 6 inches in the movement phase, as advanced rules would be unable to override this basic tenant no matter what. In other words, 'advanced' really just means 'specific', while 'basic' really just means 'general'.

However, this does not mean that advanced rules always override basic rules, as restrictions still take precedence over permissions. For example, an advanced rule may say: 'models with jump packs are able to move 12" in the movement phase', but if a model has gone to ground, then the basic rules restriction against a model being able to move in the movement phase still overrides the advanced rules permission that the model can move 12" in the movement phase.

It is also even possible for a 'basic' rule to be specific enough to override an 'advanced' rule. For example, an advanced rule may say that jump pack models can move 12" in the movement phase, but if there happened to be a 'basic' rule which actually spelled out that jump pack models can only move 6" when moving into difficult terrain (just an imaginary example here), then that 'basic' rule would still take precedence over the 'advanced' rule because it was specific enough to actually mention that it applies to jump pack models.

Finally, when GW says that codexes take precedence over the rulebook, again this is a case of generally speaking, the codexes being more 'advanced' than the advanced rules in the rulebook. Meaning, if the advanced rules in the rulebook say that Jump Pack models move 12" in the movement phase but a codex says that a special unit moves like a Jump Pack model, but up to 18", then clearly the codex rule has to take precedence over the rulebook for the whole thing to work.

But just as before, restrictions still override permissions (even if the restriction is in the rulebook and the permission is in a codex) and it is possible for rules in the rulebook to be more specific than even a codex and therefore take precedence over the codex rules.


So please, please, please do not parrot the terms: 'codex > rulebook' and 'advanced > basic' without understanding that these concepts are not absolute. They ONLY apply when the rules between two sources actually contradict, not when one is a permission and the other is a restriction.


And that quote is from a games workshop official capable of making that ruling?


Automatically Appended Next Post:
 Happyjew wrote:
If the Multi-tracker said
A model with a multi-tracker can fire an additional weapon in each Shooting phase, even if it fired an Ordnance weapon

then there would be a conflict in which the codex wins.


The codex also does not "specifically" say you can fire if you move exactly 1".

That does not mean if you move exactly 1" you cannot fire.


You are inventing restrictions on a modifier that has none.


Riptide Firing Ordnance - can it move? @ 2013/07/25 01:31:47


Post by: Happyjew


It is (part of) an explanation of "Specific>General" or "Codex>Rulebook".

You are claiming that there is a conflict and so codex>rulebook, but you don't seem to understand that it only applies when there is an actual conflict.


Riptide Firing Ordnance - can it move? @ 2013/07/25 01:33:48


Post by: Steel-W0LF


 Happyjew wrote:
It is (part of) an explanation of "Specific>General" or "Codex>Rulebook".

You are claiming that there is a conflict and so codex>rulebook, but you don't seem to understand that it only applies when there is an actual conflict.

And that does not change that it is the opinion of a regular joe like you and me, and carries the same weight.


Riptide Firing Ordnance - can it move? @ 2013/07/25 01:34:53


Post by: Happyjew


 Steel-W0LF wrote:
The codex also does not "specifically" say you can fire if you move exactly 1".

That does not mean if you move exactly 1" you can fire.


The codex does not need to specifically say you can fire if you move exactly 1". I have permission to move. Barring certain situations (which explicitly say you cannot fire if you moved) I have permission to shoot. Therefore if I move 1" I have permission to shoot, as there is no restriction. if there was a restriction (i.e. firing an Ordnance weapon), I would need specific permission to override that rule (such as Relentless).


Riptide Firing Ordnance - can it move? @ 2013/07/25 01:38:12


Post by: Nilok


I don't understand why you would want to both fire it in Ordnance mode and fire the sub weapons.

The S8 overcharged Ion Cannon dose the job just as well unless it is a Monstrous Creatures, in which case, Ripple Fire will put more shots down range to kill it.

If it is a tank and you have Fusion Blasters, again Ripple Fire will allow you to fire 3 S8 shots (two with Armourbane) instead of one S9 shot (or a S9 and a S8 with Armourbase on your argument).

Really, I don't think you could fire the Ordnance and another gun, since it prevents you from firing any other gun. In the end, I don't think it hurts the Riptide. You shouldn't rely on the Nova Charge for the Ion unless you are using it as long range fire support popping tanking.


Riptide Firing Ordnance - can it move? @ 2013/07/25 01:52:46


Post by: Mr. Shine


 Happyjew wrote:
If the Multi-tracker said
A model with a multi-tracker can fire an additional weapon in each Shooting phase, even if it fired an Ordnance weapon

then there would be a conflict in which the codex wins.


So you are saying that the Multi-tracker allowing an additional weapon to be fired (without restriction) versus ordnance saying no other weapon (which includes additional weapons) may be fired is not a conflict?


Riptide Firing Ordnance - can it move? @ 2013/07/25 02:29:21


Post by: Steel-W0LF


 Happyjew wrote:
 Steel-W0LF wrote:
The codex also does not "specifically" say you can fire if you move exactly 1".

That does not mean if you move exactly 1" you can fire.


The codex does not need to specifically say you can fire if you move exactly 1". I have permission to move. Barring certain situations (which explicitly say you cannot fire if you moved) I have permission to shoot. Therefore if I move 1" I have permission to shoot, as there is no restriction. if there was a restriction (i.e. firing an Ordnance weapon), I would need specific permission to override that rule (such as Relentless).


And I have permission to fire ordinances per the BRB.

And per the codex I have permission to fire 1 additional.


You can't win this because the rules you are wanting to be there are not.


Riptide Firing Ordnance - can it move? @ 2013/07/25 02:34:45


Post by: Happyjew


The rules are permissive. This is the only way to play a game. In order for somebody to do something they must have permission. On occasion, a model is restricted from doing something it normally has permission to do. In order to override a restriction, you must have specific permission to override the restriction. Examples include:
Skyfire vs Hard to Hit
Pinpoint vs Snap Shots
Assault Vehicle vs charging after disembarking
ATSKNF vs Sweeping Advance
Relentless vs moving and charging in the same turn as firing ordnance weapons.

In every situation, the permission to override the restriction is specifically mentioned. Where is the specific permission to override the 1 weapon restriction from ordnance weapons?


Riptide Firing Ordnance - can it move? @ 2013/07/25 02:37:27


Post by: Steel-W0LF


 Happyjew wrote:
The rules are permissive. This is the only way to play a game. In order for somebody to do something they must have permission. On occasion, a model is restricted from doing something it normally has permission to do. In order to override a restriction, you must have specific permission to override the restriction. Examples include:
Skyfire vs Hard to Hit
Pinpoint vs Snap Shots
Assault Vehicle vs charging after disembarking
ATSKNF vs Sweeping Advance
Relentless vs moving and charging in the same turn as firing ordnance weapons.

In every situation, the permission to override the restriction is specifically mentioned. Where is the specific permission to override the 1 weapon restriction from ordnance weapons?


Soooo: "May fire one additional weapon..." actually is NOT permission to fire one additional weapon now? Is that the current argument?


Riptide Firing Ordnance - can it move? @ 2013/07/25 02:43:07


Post by: Mr. Shine


 Happyjew wrote:
In every situation, the permission to override the restriction is specifically mentioned. Where is the specific permission to override the 1 weapon restriction from ordnance weapons?


Would you like to answer my question as to rules conflict?

I understand your point, but the fact remains however that with a Multi-tracker allowing a model to fire an additional weapon and ordnance stating that no other weapon may be fired (thus no additional weapon) there is a conflict. If we go the way you are interpreting it that conflict remains and we ignore pg. 7 of the BRB, yet if we go with allowing an additional weapon to be fired there is no conflict.


Riptide Firing Ordnance - can it move? @ 2013/07/25 02:51:32


Post by: Tarrasq


Using the same Ordnance + 1 argument, I could assert that you can not only fire one weapon if you run but you can shoot one weapon in the opponent's shooting phase. The rule does say "each shooting phase" and 0 + 1 = 1 after all.

Of course the above is absurd, but that's what the "defies all restrictions" interpretation leads to.


Riptide Firing Ordnance - can it move? @ 2013/07/25 02:56:00


Post by: S.K.Ren


 Steel-W0LF wrote:

Soooo: "May fire one additional weapon..." actually is NOT permission to fire one additional weapon now? Is that the current argument?


It has nothing to do with "How many weapons can I fire in addition to an Ordnance weapon?". Its a matter of "Can I fire any weapons at all in addition to an Ordnance Weapon?"

If this were a line of code an X was the variable for the number of shots you would get, X wouldn't be '0', it would be 'nil'


Riptide Firing Ordnance - can it move? @ 2013/07/25 02:59:53


Post by: Mr. Shine


 Tarrasq wrote:
Using the same Ordnance + 1 argument, I could assert that you can not only fire one weapon if you run but you can shoot one weapon in the opponent's shooting phase. The rule does say "each shooting phase" and 0 + 1 = 1 after all.

Of course the above is absurd, but that's what the "defies all restrictions" interpretation leads to.


Except that by running or it being the enemy player's shooting phase you do not make any shooting attacks at all. Something cannot be in addition to nothing.

 S.K.Ren wrote:
It has nothing to do with "How many weapons can I fire in addition to an Ordnance weapon?". Its a matter of "Can I fire any weapons at all in addition to an Ordnance Weapon?"


Except the rules for Multi-tracker state without restriction that an additional weapon may be fired, thus creating a conflict, and as per pg. 7 of the BRB, Codex > BRB.


Riptide Firing Ordnance - can it move? @ 2013/07/25 03:08:42


Post by: jdjamesdean@mail.com


 Steel-W0LF wrote:
 Happyjew wrote:
The rules are permissive. This is the only way to play a game. In order for somebody to do something they must have permission. On occasion, a model is restricted from doing something it normally has permission to do. In order to override a restriction, you must have specific permission to override the restriction. Examples include:
Skyfire vs Hard to Hit
Pinpoint vs Snap Shots
Assault Vehicle vs charging after disembarking
ATSKNF vs Sweeping Advance
Relentless vs moving and charging in the same turn as firing ordnance weapons.

In every situation, the permission to override the restriction is specifically mentioned. Where is the specific permission to override the 1 weapon restriction from ordnance weapons?


Soooo: "May fire one additional weapon..." actually is NOT permission to fire one additional weapon now? Is that the current argument?


Hey why didn't anyone tell me it was TROLLOLL season...


Riptide Firing Ordnance - can it move? @ 2013/07/25 03:15:34


Post by: Steel-W0LF


 S.K.Ren wrote:
 Steel-W0LF wrote:

Soooo: "May fire one additional weapon..." actually is NOT permission to fire one additional weapon now? Is that the current argument?


It has nothing to do with "How many weapons can I fire in addition to an Ordnance weapon?". Its a matter of "Can I fire any weapons at all in addition to an Ordnance Weapon?"

If this were a line of code an X was the variable for the number of shots you would get, X wouldn't be '0', it would be 'nil'


And the codex says X+1...

codex wins.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
jdjamesdean@mail.com wrote:
 Steel-W0LF wrote:
 Happyjew wrote:
The rules are permissive. This is the only way to play a game. In order for somebody to do something they must have permission. On occasion, a model is restricted from doing something it normally has permission to do. In order to override a restriction, you must have specific permission to override the restriction. Examples include:
Skyfire vs Hard to Hit
Pinpoint vs Snap Shots
Assault Vehicle vs charging after disembarking
ATSKNF vs Sweeping Advance
Relentless vs moving and charging in the same turn as firing ordnance weapons.

In every situation, the permission to override the restriction is specifically mentioned. Where is the specific permission to override the 1 weapon restriction from ordnance weapons?


Soooo: "May fire one additional weapon..." actually is NOT permission to fire one additional weapon now? Is that the current argument?


Hey why didn't anyone tell me it was TROLLOLL season...


Why didnt anyone tell me it was "I want to make a pointless post in this thread so I sound relevant" season....


Riptide Firing Ordnance - can it move? @ 2013/07/25 03:20:05


Post by: S.K.Ren


Mr. Shine wrote:

Except the rules for Multi-tracker state without restriction that an additional weapon may be fired, thus creating a conflict, and as per pg. 7 of the BRB, Codex > BRB.

Oh? So the rule book explicitly states "...without exception..."? Can we get the full rule quoted for us non Tau? And Im afraid I must return to my example questions.

"How many weapons can I fire in addition to an Ordnance weapon?" is quantitative. It asks for a number. It is not a permissive question.

"Can I fire any weapons at all in addition to an Ordnance Weapon?" is permissive. It asks a yes or no question. You need to find a rule that explicitly says yes to this question before the first one is even valid for consideration.

The Ordnance rule doesn't say you can't fire any more weapons it says you cannot fire any other weapons. More would indicate a value, in this case of 1 or 0 depending on whether you count the Ordnance weapon. Other indicates a complete encompassing of all other weapons. It is not a number of weapons, it is not a group of weapons, it is all weapons. And all weapons are forbidden from firing in the same phase as an Ordnance weapon fired by a non Vehicle model.


Riptide Firing Ordnance - can it move? @ 2013/07/25 03:24:25


Post by: Miri


"... may fire an additional weapon during its shooting phase"


Riptide Firing Ordnance - can it move? @ 2013/07/25 03:24:35


Post by: Ghaz


Mr. Shine wrote:
Except that by running or it being the enemy player's shooting phase you do not make any shooting attacks at all. Something cannot be in addition to nothing.

And by firing ordnance you can not fire any other weapons. Likewise something cannot be in addition to nothing yet you insist it can.


Riptide Firing Ordnance - can it move? @ 2013/07/25 03:24:56


Post by: Steel-W0LF


 S.K.Ren wrote:
Mr. Shine wrote:

Except the rules for Multi-tracker state without restriction that an additional weapon may be fired, thus creating a conflict, and as per pg. 7 of the BRB, Codex > BRB.

Oh? So the rule book explicitly states "...without exception..."? Can we get the full rule quoted for us non Tau? And Im afraid I must return to my example questions.

"How many weapons can I fire in addition to an Ordnance weapon?" is quantitative. It asks for a number. It is not a permissive question.

"Can I fire any weapons at all in addition to an Ordnance Weapon?" is permissive. It asks a yes or no question. You need to find a rule that explicitly says yes to this question before the first one is even valid for consideration.

The Ordnance rule doesn't say you can't fire any more weapons it says you cannot fire any other weapons. More would indicate a value, in this case of 1 or 0 depending on whether you count the Ordnance weapon. Other indicates a complete encompassing of all other weapons. It is not a number of weapons, it is not a group of weapons, it is all weapons. And all weapons are forbidden from firing in addition to an Ordnance weapon fired by a non Vehicle model.


p.69 Multi-Tracker: A model with a multi-tracker can fire one additional weapon in each shooting phase.


Riptide Firing Ordnance - can it move? @ 2013/07/25 03:26:16


Post by: HawaiiMatt


 Happyjew wrote:
If the Multi-tracker said
A model with a multi-tracker can fire an additional weapon in each Shooting phase, even if it fired an Ordnance weapon

then there would be a conflict in which the codex wins.
However,
 yakface wrote:
3) Specific overrides general, although remembering that restrictions still override permissions.


Its very simple, when two rules contradict each other, the one that is more specific must take precedence. When GW talks about advanced rules taking precedence over basic rules, this simply means something like: the basic rules for movement say that models move 6" in the movement phase. But then in the advanced rules they'll say stuff like: 'models using a jump pack in the movement phase move 12 inches'.

If the advanced rules didn't take precedence over the basic rules, then all models would move 6 inches in the movement phase, as advanced rules would be unable to override this basic tenant no matter what. In other words, 'advanced' really just means 'specific', while 'basic' really just means 'general'.

However, this does not mean that advanced rules always override basic rules, as restrictions still take precedence over permissions. For example, an advanced rule may say: 'models with jump packs are able to move 12" in the movement phase', but if a model has gone to ground, then the basic rules restriction against a model being able to move in the movement phase still overrides the advanced rules permission that the model can move 12" in the movement phase.

It is also even possible for a 'basic' rule to be specific enough to override an 'advanced' rule. For example, an advanced rule may say that jump pack models can move 12" in the movement phase, but if there happened to be a 'basic' rule which actually spelled out that jump pack models can only move 6" when moving into difficult terrain (just an imaginary example here), then that 'basic' rule would still take precedence over the 'advanced' rule because it was specific enough to actually mention that it applies to jump pack models.

Finally, when GW says that codexes take precedence over the rulebook, again this is a case of generally speaking, the codexes being more 'advanced' than the advanced rules in the rulebook. Meaning, if the advanced rules in the rulebook say that Jump Pack models move 12" in the movement phase but a codex says that a special unit moves like a Jump Pack model, but up to 18", then clearly the codex rule has to take precedence over the rulebook for the whole thing to work.

But just as before, restrictions still override permissions (even if the restriction is in the rulebook and the permission is in a codex) and it is possible for rules in the rulebook to be more specific than even a codex and therefore take precedence over the codex rules.


So please, please, please do not parrot the terms: 'codex > rulebook' and 'advanced > basic' without understanding that these concepts are not absolute. They ONLY apply when the rules between two sources actually contradict, not when one is a permission and the other is a restriction.


Not that I disagree, but everything in that quote seems to be lacking a page number.

As for the riptide firing 3 weapons; easy.
Park it next to the aegis defensive line and man the Quad Gun.

-Matt


Riptide Firing Ordnance - can it move? @ 2013/07/25 03:31:34


Post by: S.K.Ren


 Miri wrote:
"... may fire an additional weapon during its shooting phase"

I don't see '...without exception...' in there, which is my point. You say "... may fire an additional weapon", does it specify what kind? No? Then its a basic(BRB pg 7) rule indicating that you can fire up to your normal limit +1 under normal circumstances.

Ordnance weapon has a specific restriction to fire that type of weapon. Unless Multi-tracker specifically says that it ignores the firing restrictions of Ordnance or something along those lines, Ordnance is more advanced(BRB pg 7) than Multi-tracker and its rules take precedence.


Riptide Firing Ordnance - can it move? @ 2013/07/25 03:31:47


Post by: Miri


HawaiiMatt wrote:


Not that I disagree, but everything in that quote seems to be lacking a page number.

As for the riptide firing 3 weapons; easy.
Park it next to the aegis defensive line and man the Quad Gun.

-Matt


That gets more fun when you Ripple-fire the Plasma/Fusion/Smart Missiles


Riptide Firing Ordnance - can it move? @ 2013/07/25 03:38:28


Post by: Steel-W0LF


 S.K.Ren wrote:
 Miri wrote:
"... may fire an additional weapon during its shooting phase"

I don't see '...without exception...' in there, which is my point. You say "... may fire an additional weapon", does it specify what kind? No? Then its a general rule indicating that you can fire up to your normal limit +1 under normal circumstances.

Ordnance weapon has a specific restriction to fire that type of weapon. Unless Multi-tracker specifically says that it ignores the firing restrictions of Ordnance or something along those lines, Ordnance is more specific than Multi-tracker and its rules take precedence.


Then you need to post a page number that defines "general rules" vs "specific rules"...



Ready? GO!


Riptide Firing Ordnance - can it move? @ 2013/07/25 03:40:04


Post by: S.K.Ren


There fixed. I'm sorry, its Basic and Advanced but they're defined the same anyways


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Multi-tracker does not call out any specific unit, model, rule or piece of wargear and is thusly NOT an Advanced rule. An please don't start a recursive argument referencing itself.

Edit: On second thought, I suppose it does reference itself but thats another can of worms I'd rather not open right this instant.


Riptide Firing Ordnance - can it move? @ 2013/07/25 03:44:46


Post by: Steel-W0LF


 S.K.Ren wrote:
There fixed. I'm sorry, its Basic and Advanced but they're defined the same anyways


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Multi-tracker does not call out any specific unit, model, rule or piece of wargear and is thusly NOT an Advanced rule


It IS a piece of wargear.....


Automatically Appended Next Post:
 S.K.Ren wrote:
 Miri wrote:
"... may fire an additional weapon during its shooting phase"

I don't see '...without exception...' in there, which is my point. You say "... may fire an additional weapon", does it specify what kind? No? Then its a basic(BRB pg 7) rule indicating that you can fire up to your normal limit +1 under normal circumstances.

Ordnance weapon has a specific restriction to fire that type of weapon. Unless Multi-tracker specifically says that it ignores the firing restrictions of Ordnance or something along those lines, Ordnance is more advanced(BRB pg 7) than Multi-tracker and its rules take precedence.


And agian...

Ordnance says 0 weapons
Tau Codex says 1...

What do you do in a conflict?

Codex wins.


Riptide Firing Ordnance - can it move? @ 2013/07/25 03:49:44


Post by: S.K.Ren


Oh ffs GW needs to get off its f****** a** and write some new FAQs. We can argue this till we're blue in the face but unless you play together, what 'we' say doesn't really matter as we'll either defer to HIWPI or TO verdict.


Riptide Firing Ordnance - can it move? @ 2013/07/25 03:52:36


Post by: Steel-W0LF


 S.K.Ren wrote:
Oh ffs GW needs to get off its f****** a** and write some new FAQs. We can argue this till we're blue in the face but unless you play together, what 'we' say doesn't really matter as we'll either defer to HIWPI or TO verdict.


That I'll agree with.

And in a real game I'd roll it off to decide if it was debated during a game. But this forum is not about rolling off.


Riptide Firing Ordnance - can it move? @ 2013/07/25 04:10:57


Post by: Mr. Shine


 Ghaz wrote:
And by firing ordnance you can not fire any other weapons. Likewise something cannot be in addition to nothing yet you insist it can.


So firing an ordnance weapon is not firing a weapon? The additional weapon fired is in addition to the ordnance weapon, which is in conflict with the ordnance rules but Codex > BRB so Multi-tracker takes precedence over the ordnance restriction.

 S.K.Ren wrote:
I don't see '...without exception...' in there, which is my point. You say "... may fire an additional weapon", does it specify what kind? No? Then its a basic(BRB pg 7) rule indicating that you can fire up to your normal limit +1 under normal circumstances.

Ordnance weapon has a specific restriction to fire that type of weapon. Unless Multi-tracker specifically says that it ignores the firing restrictions of Ordnance or something along those lines, Ordnance is more advanced(BRB pg 7) than Multi-tracker and its rules take precedence.


You're just shifting the goal posts now. The fact that no exception to the ability to fire an additional weapon is stated means that there is no exception.

You say that the ordnance rules say that no other weapons may be fired, which is entirely true. Agreed. But this is semantically and logically the same as saying no additional weapons may be fired, so your point is irrelevant.

Again, shooting an ordnance weapon with a Multi-tracker creates a conflict between the BRB rules for ordnance and Codex: Tau rules for firing an additional weapon. However as per pg. 7 of the BRB, Codex: Tau takes precedence over BRB.


Riptide Firing Ordnance - can it move? @ 2013/07/25 04:40:25


Post by: Ghaz


It's no worse than you saying 0+1=0 when its clearly 1. So which is it? You can't have your cake and eat it too. You can either fire the additional weapon in both instances or neither.


Riptide Firing Ordnance - can it move? @ 2013/07/25 04:44:30


Post by: Mr. Shine


 Ghaz wrote:
It's no worse than you saying 0+1=0 when its clearly 1. So which is it? You can't have your cake and eat it too. You can either fire the additional weapon in both instances or neither.


Which both instances?

You mentioned when running and in the opponent's shooting phase. In those instances you may not shoot at all, thus the zero shooting and thus you cannot have something in addition to nothing. In the case of ordnance you are firing an ordnance weapon, thus you have something to shoot in addition to.


Riptide Firing Ordnance - can it move? @ 2013/07/25 04:58:40


Post by: Ghaz


And so you decide to ignore one restriction (you can't fire another weapon if you fire an ordnance weapon) yet you enforce another one (you have to give up firing if you run). 0+1=1, not 0. Your statements say that there are no restrictions on when the additional weapon can be used according to the codex, so why are you keeping the restriction placed on shooting when you run from the BRB?


Riptide Firing Ordnance - can it move? @ 2013/07/25 05:05:28


Post by: Savageconvoy


 Ghaz wrote:
And so you decide to ignore one restriction (you can't fire another weapon if you fire an ordnance weapon) yet you enforce another one (you have to give up firing if you run). 0+1=1, not 0. Your statements say that there are no restrictions on when the additional weapon can be used according to the codex, so why are you keeping the restriction placed on shooting when you run from the BRB?

Except that the multi-tracker specifies your shooting phase.
It's completely different argument though. It's like arguing why you can't make CC attacks when you're not in CC.


Riptide Firing Ordnance - can it move? @ 2013/07/25 05:10:33


Post by: Ghaz


 Savageconvoy wrote:
Except that the multi-tracker specifies your shooting phase.

And please tell us when your models may run.


Riptide Firing Ordnance - can it move? @ 2013/07/25 05:19:11


Post by: davou


More, the multitracker says a model May fire one additional weapon... So firing a single weapon is still an option to the player.

When you fire ord, it says you may only fire one....

Put those two sentences together and you get: "You may fire one or two weapons, but you may only fire one." The only way to have no conflict there, is to fire one weapon.


Riptide Firing Ordnance - can it move? @ 2013/07/25 05:34:41


Post by: Mr. Shine


 Ghaz wrote:
And so you decide to ignore one restriction (you can't fire another weapon if you fire an ordnance weapon) yet you enforce another one (you have to give up firing if you run). 0+1=1, not 0. Your statements say that there are no restrictions on when the additional weapon can be used according to the codex, so why are you keeping the restriction placed on shooting when you run from the BRB?


You're missing the point. In addition to or additional requires an existing weapon shot in the first place. You don't describe something being in addition when it is the only of its kind.

 Savageconvoy wrote:
It's completely different argument though. It's like arguing why you can't make CC attacks when you're not in CC.


It actually doesn't. It says "A model with a multi-tracker can fire an additional weapon in each Shooting phase."

Of course, because you cannot fire any weapon to begin with in the enemy shooting phase, you are unable to use the Multi-tracker to shoot an additional weapon. Similarly if you choose to run you do so instead of firing, thus you are not firing a weapon for you to then shoot another additional weapon.

If you were able to shoot and run, or shoot in the enemy shooting phase, then yes you could use the Multi-tracker.

 davou wrote:
More, the multitracker says a model May fire one additional weapon... So firing a single weapon is still an option to the player.

When you fire ord, it says you may only fire one....

Put those two sentences together and you get: "You may fire one or two weapons, but you may only fire one." The only way to have no conflict there, is to fire one weapon.


I'm not sure what your point is here. When you put both sentences together you have two conflicting sentences, thus we go back to pg. 7 of the BRB where Codex rules take precedence over BRB rules.


Riptide Firing Ordnance - can it move? @ 2013/07/25 05:39:29


Post by: Ghaz


No. You're missing the point. 0+1=1. One in addition to zero is still one. It is not zero.


Riptide Firing Ordnance - can it move? @ 2013/07/25 05:46:05


Post by: Savageconvoy


 Ghaz wrote:
No. You're missing the point. 0+1=1. One in addition to zero is still one. It is not zero.
No. It states that you fire one additional weapon. The term additional means that a weapon was fired before hand. If you don't fire with one weapon, then you can't fire an additional weapon because then the term wouldn't apply.

In the case of the Ordnance weapon you're still firing the one shot and you're able to fire one weapon in addition to it. It's not that hard, but the question you bring up is purely to build a strawman for the way the wargear words it's effects.
Math doesn't work in this, because it's missing out on the context of the situation.


Riptide Firing Ordnance - can it move? @ 2013/07/25 05:52:04


Post by: Mr. Shine


 Ghaz wrote:
No. You're missing the point. 0+1=1. One in addition to zero is still one. It is not zero.


Is English your native language? Please don't think I'm trying to offend, but it seems you're not grasping the semantic point I'm making.

As Savageconvoy has pointed out, you do not use the term "additional" when you have zero to start with.

I'm not sure why we're arguing this though because the point is moot anyway. The ordnance restriction on firing other weapons is waived as soon as a Multi-tracker comes into the equation. Let me break it down:

1. Ordnance disallows you from firing any other weapon.
2. Multi-tracker allows you to fire an additional weapon.
3. Ordnance and Multi-tracker are in conflict, invoking pg. 7 of the BRB where Codex rule takes precedence over BRB rule.
4. Multi-tracker allows you to fire an additional weapon.


Riptide Firing Ordnance - can it move? @ 2013/07/25 05:56:49


Post by: MerkQT


I understand where Ghaz is coming from. You can always plus one onto something unless the value is null. (In which case you would have conceded your point about being able to fire ordnance and an additional weapon)

For example; The rule for running is that you cannot fire weapons after running. So the value for firing weapons is null. You simply can't do it and you certainly can't add an additional weapon. The same happens with ordnance.

However, what Ghaz is trying to make everyone understand is, they are currently viewing it as a zero. In which case, you CAN plus one to it. So he brings up the question; "If you are allowing yourself to shoot ordnance with an additional weapon, are you allowing yourself to run and then shoot a weapon?"

To do the sequence (as I understand it)

-You have multitracker. You may fire 3 shots at this point. (Two for being monstrous, one from multi-tracker)
-You fire ordnance.
-Ordnance rule comes into effect changing the weapons allowed to fire value to a null value.
-Multi-tracker attempts to bring this back up to one, however as it is now a null value it cannot do this.


I am NOT 100% on this, and it would be mighty helpful if the entire thing was FAQ'd. Until it was, I would roll for the outcome in my game.

EDIT: Re-reading my post, I realize it sounds wonky and not articulated well, so I apologize in advance. If what I'm saying isn't making sense, just disregard the post. I just thought I'd throw in my two cents, not to have a debate.


Riptide Firing Ordnance - can it move? @ 2013/07/25 06:04:23


Post by: Mr. Shine


MerkQT wrote:
I understand where Ghaz is coming from. You can always plus one onto something unless the value is null. (In which case you would have conceded your point about being able to fire ordnance and an additional weapon)

For example; The rule for running is that you cannot fire weapons after running. So the value for firing weapons is null. You simply can't do it and you certainly can't add an additional weapon. The same happens with ordnance.

However, what Ghaz is trying to make everyone understand is, they are currently viewing it as a zero. In which case, you CAN plus one to it. So he brings up the question; "If you are allowing yourself to shoot ordnance with an additional weapon, are you allowing yourself to run and then shoot a weapon?"


But the comparison doesn't work for the reasons I've stated. The wording is important, and you do not describe things as being additional to nothingness. Thus when you may not shoot a weapon to begin with (such as when running, or in the enemy shooting phase) there is nothing upon which you can add another weapon.

To do the sequence (as I understand it)

-You have multitracker. You may fire 2 shots at this point.
-You fire ordnance.
-Ordnance rule comes into effect changing the weapons allowed to fire value to a null value.
-Multi-tracker attempts to bring this back up to one, however as it is now a null value it cannot do this.


It is not a matter of one rule being invoked before or after the other. They are invoked simultaneously and thus conflict with one another. The Multi-tracker takes precedence as a Codex rule.


Riptide Firing Ordnance - can it move? @ 2013/07/25 06:09:53


Post by: MerkQT


But the comparison doesn't work for the reasons I've stated. The wording is important, and you do not describe things as being additional to nothingness. Thus when you may not shoot a weapon to begin with (such as when running, or in the enemy shooting phase) there is nothing upon which you can add another weapon.


Sure they can. To use another (somewhat stupid) analogy is that there is a cake at a party. You have none, but the host says you can have an additional piece if you want. So 0 + 1 = 1.
However, if there was no cake to begin with, it's impossible to take a piece. (Sorry that sounds pretty derpy.)

It is not a matter of one rule being invoked before or after the other. They are invoked simultaneously and thus conflict with one another. The Multi-tracker takes precedence as a Codex rule.

I'm not 100% on the whole matter, but yeah, if this was the case I would one hundred percent agree with you.


Riptide Firing Ordnance - can it move? @ 2013/07/25 06:10:08


Post by: Steel-W0LF


Ordnance is a weapon system. Which is why it fits the above description he's tryin to state about "additional".

If I have zero dollars, you don't say to me "I'm going to give you an additional dollar" as I don't have any to begin with.

If I have one dollar, you CAN say "I'm going to give you an additional dollar."

Firing an ordinance weapon, you ARE already shooting one weapon system. Multi tracker says you can fire one additional.


Codex trumps.


Riptide Firing Ordnance - can it move? @ 2013/07/25 06:32:16


Post by: MerkQT


Correct me if i'm wrong, but if I have a value of zero and I give an additional numerical value of one. Does that not equal one?


Riptide Firing Ordnance - can it move? @ 2013/07/25 06:38:38


Post by: Mr. Shine


MerkQT wrote:
Sure they can. To use another (somewhat stupid) analogy is that there is a cake at a party. You have none, but the host says you can have an additional piece if you want. So 0 + 1 = 1.
However, if there was no cake to begin with, it's impossible to take a piece. (Sorry that sounds pretty derpy.)


Err, it sounds derpy because it's incorrect usage of the term "additional". If you have none to begin with, the host says you can have a piece of cake. They would then say you can have an additional or another piece of cake from that point onwards.

MerkQT wrote:
Correct me if i'm wrong, but if I have a value of zero and I give an additional numerical value of one. Does that not equal one?


Mathematical addition is not the same as being granted something additional.


Riptide Firing Ordnance - can it move? @ 2013/07/25 06:40:03


Post by: Steel-W0LF


MerkQT wrote:
Correct me if i'm wrong, but if I have a value of zero and I give an additional numerical value of one. Does that not equal one?


if you were referring to a mathematical story problem, yes.

In English common usage, no as its improper grammar as exampled above.


Riptide Firing Ordnance - can it move? @ 2013/07/25 06:47:46


Post by: doktor_g


This obviously needs a FAQ. But I'd say HJ quoting Yakface is not appropriate in YMtC. Personally I'd prefer HJ to be correct since I play Orks, but rules quotes seem to be in SW's favor. Arguing rhetorically regarding this game (YF/HJ) is pointless as it is a rule set not based solely on logic or whether its "permissive" or "specific>general". However "codex > BRB" is on page 7. Arguing against page 7 needs to at least be accompanied by a similar example from other 6th Ed (ie Daemon, CSM, Tau, Eldar) codices... Not rhetoric, other posts (regardless of their eloquence), or theory. Page numbers, please.


Riptide Firing Ordnance - can it move? @ 2013/07/25 06:56:24


Post by: MerkQT


Righto, I suppose that's fair enough.

I think I've changed my viewpoint on this whole subject now that's been clarified.


Riptide Firing Ordnance - can it move? @ 2013/07/25 07:00:22


Post by: Steel-W0LF


 doktor_g wrote:
This obviously needs a FAQ. But I'd say HJ quoting Yakface is not appropriate in YMtC. Personally I'd prefer HJ to be correct since I play Orks, but rules quotes seem to be in SW's favor. Arguing rhetorically regarding this game (YF/HJ) is pointless as it is a rule set not based solely on logic or whether its "permissive" or "specific>general". However "codex > BRB" is on page 7. Arguing against page 7 needs to at least be accompanied by a similar example from other 6th Ed (ie Daemon, CSM, Tau, Eldar) codices... Not rhetoric, other posts (regardless of their eloquence), or theory. Page numbers, please.


Being I'm a nice guy and all... I'll trade you "Firing Ordnance+1" for a 3rd weapon system to make Monstrous Creature+Multi-Tracker make more sense? hehe


Riptide Firing Ordnance - can it move? @ 2013/07/25 07:25:27


Post by: DeathReaper


 Steel-W0LF wrote:
Ordnance is a weapon system. Which is why it fits the above description he's tryin to state about "additional".

If I have zero dollars, you don't say to me "I'm going to give you an additional dollar" as I don't have any to begin with.

If I have one dollar, you CAN say "I'm going to give you an additional dollar."

Firing an ordinance weapon, you ARE already shooting one weapon system. Multi tracker says you can fire one additional.


Codex trumps.
You have it incorrect, it is not a blanket "Codex trumps" it is: Codex only trumps when there is a conflict.

There is no conflict here, and you seem to be misunderstanding that.

There is a conflict in Pinpoint vs Snap Shots, and in that case codex trumps because there is a conflict. The codex specifically says you can increase the BS of a snap shot when the BRB says you can not.

You really need to re-read the post about specific Vs. General:

http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/30/520554.page#5505107



Riptide Firing Ordnance - can it move? @ 2013/07/25 07:28:14


Post by: JinxDragon


One of the thing I would like you to all remember is how the Riptide gets the multi-tracker. It isn't granted specifically by name but as part of a larger ruleset: Battlesuits. The Battlesuit rules grant a few additional things as well, much of which do benefit the Riptide. This makes it completely plausible that the multi-tracker is not meant to do anything for the riptide, it's granting was a side effect of a larger rules that was designed for non-monstrous creatures as well. Looking at the whole rule, where it comes from and whom else gets it, grants you a better context to judge these matters.

It isn't a unique situation either as other units have rules which do nothing for them, granted simply because are default rules for multiple units of which some do benefit.

Also want to point out that codex greater then BRB does not always work. Smash is a very good example of this, as it can never be applied if codex beats rulebook. Smash grants the ability to change the AP of a weapon to 2, but all weapon rules are 'advanced rules.' For page 7 to be applied every time smash would be forbidden to change the AP of any weapon found in the codex. This gets even more complicated as nothing in the basic rule book grants permission for a basic rule book advanced rule to over-write another advanced rule found in said rulebook. Therefore Smash would never be able to change the AP of any weapon, but it clearly is meant to do so because it states it does so!

This is why we where at DakkaDakka require a rule to be in direct conflict before page 7 comes into play and not just indirect conflicts like this one here.


Riptide Firing Ordnance - can it move? @ 2013/07/25 07:30:10


Post by: Steel-W0LF


 DeathReaper wrote:
 Steel-W0LF wrote:
Ordnance is a weapon system. Which is why it fits the above description he's tryin to state about "additional".

If I have zero dollars, you don't say to me "I'm going to give you an additional dollar" as I don't have any to begin with.

If I have one dollar, you CAN say "I'm going to give you an additional dollar."

Firing an ordinance weapon, you ARE already shooting one weapon system. Multi tracker says you can fire one additional.


Codex trumps.
You have it incorrect, it is not a blanket "Codex trumps" it is: Codex only trumps when there is a conflict.

There is no conflict here, and you seem to be misunderstanding that.

There is a conflict in Pinpoint vs Snap Shots, and in that case codex trumps because there is a conflict. The codex specifically says you can increase the BS of a snap shot when the BRB says you can not.

You really need to re-read the post about specific Vs. General:

http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/30/520554.page#5505107



That post, while eloquent and well written, is an opinion.


If Ordinance says you can fire no additional, and Multi Tracker says you can, that IS the definition of a conflict.


Riptide Firing Ordnance - can it move? @ 2013/07/25 07:31:49


Post by: jdjamesdean@mail.com


 Steel-W0LF wrote:
 DeathReaper wrote:
 Steel-W0LF wrote:
Ordnance is a weapon system. Which is why it fits the above description he's tryin to state about "additional".

If I have zero dollars, you don't say to me "I'm going to give you an additional dollar" as I don't have any to begin with.

If I have one dollar, you CAN say "I'm going to give you an additional dollar."

Firing an ordinance weapon, you ARE already shooting one weapon system. Multi tracker says you can fire one additional.


Codex trumps.
You have it incorrect, it is not a blanket "Codex trumps" it is: Codex only trumps when there is a conflict.

There is no conflict here, and you seem to be misunderstanding that.

There is a conflict in Pinpoint vs Snap Shots, and in that case codex trumps because there is a conflict. The codex specifically says you can increase the BS of a snap shot when the BRB says you can not.

You really need to re-read the post about specific Vs. General:

http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/30/520554.page#5505107



That post, while eloquent and well written, is an opinion.


If Ordinance says you can fire no additional, and Multi Tracker says you can, that IS the definition of a conflict.


Well that's just your opinion as the more specific rule would say no it cannot.


Riptide Firing Ordnance - can it move? @ 2013/07/25 07:32:38


Post by: DeathReaper


 Steel-W0LF wrote:
That post, while eloquent and well written, is an opinion.

It is actually how a permissive ruleset works.

If you do not understand that then there can be no debate.


Riptide Firing Ordnance - can it move? @ 2013/07/25 07:33:39


Post by: nosferatu1001


Only when multi says "even if ordnance" would it generate a conflict

Lookup assault vehicle vs arriving from reserves, or running. Your method results in you being able to assault after doing these, except we know this isn't true.


Riptide Firing Ordnance - can it move? @ 2013/07/25 07:44:21


Post by: Steel-W0LF


nosferatu1001 wrote:
Only when multi says "even if ordnance" would it generate a conflict

Lookup assault vehicle vs arriving from reserves, or running. Your method results in you being able to assault after doing these, except we know this isn't true.


Incorrect:

Because we already know in that instance you cannot assault at all. The rules say so.

In the ordinance example we already know the situation allows you to fire as you ARE firing ordnance. It's just whether you can shoot additional. BRB says no, the codex gives you an unrestricted yes. That is the definition of a conflict. The codex wins.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
 DeathReaper wrote:
 Steel-W0LF wrote:
That post, while eloquent and well written, is an opinion.

It is actually how a permissive ruleset works.

If you do not understand that then there can be no debate.


Then explain to the class why "can fire an additional weapon" is actually NOT a permission to do so.....


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Final post of the night:

You guys can not like the rule all you like.
You can even not play it in your own games.


What you can't do is show up to a debate with no rules, no page numbers, and just a post of a persons opinion on how a permissive rule set works, and claim it directly contradicts rules that ARE written in the BRB and the codex.


Riptide Firing Ordnance - can it move? @ 2013/07/25 07:55:55


Post by: DeathReaper


You can, just not when you fire Ordnance as you have no specific permission to fire any other weapons.

Pinpoint vs Snap Shots is a conflict and Pinpoint specifically addresses Adjusting Snap Shots even though the BRB says nothing can adjust a snap shot.

But a Signum does not specifically mention snap shots so that can not adjust the BS of a snap shot.


P.S. and what you can't do is show up to a debate but not understand how the permissive ruleset works. as such there can be no further debate until you understand the functions within a permissive ruleset.

Your way of thinking makes you able to arrive from reserve in an assault vehicle, disembark and charge the same turn, which creates an inconsistency within the ruleset and that is a bad thing.


Riptide Firing Ordnance - can it move? @ 2013/07/25 08:00:34


Post by: Steel-W0LF


 DeathReaper wrote:
You can, just not when you fire Ordnance as you have no specific permission to fire any other weapons.

Pinpoint vs Snap Shots is a conflict and Pinpoint specifically addresses Adjusting Snap Shots even though the BRB says nothing can adjust a snap shot.

But a Signum does not specifically mention snap shots so that can not adjust the BS of a snap shot.


"You may fire one additional......" IS permission.

Gnight.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Quote a page number and paragraph for "permissive rule set" please....... I'll wait.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
To use you assault example:

If there was a piece of wargear that said "you can assault an additional 6" in your assault phase" and you arrived from reserve, you could not assault as you are not allowed to assault at all.

In the case of ordnance and additional weapon, we know shooting is permitted, or else you couldn't shoot the ordinance. So yes you have permission to fire. Ordinance says you can't fire anything else, but the Tau codex multi tracker does give you permission to. BRB denying permission, codex granting it....pg 7 says the codex wins.



Riptide Firing Ordnance - can it move? @ 2013/07/25 08:08:05


Post by: jdjamesdean@mail.com


 Steel-W0LF wrote:
 DeathReaper wrote:
You can, just not when you fire Ordnance as you have no specific permission to fire any other weapons.

Pinpoint vs Snap Shots is a conflict and Pinpoint specifically addresses Adjusting Snap Shots even though the BRB says nothing can adjust a snap shot.

But a Signum does not specifically mention snap shots so that can not adjust the BS of a snap shot.


"You may fire one additional......" IS permission.

Gnight.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Quote a page number and paragraph for "permissive rule set" please....... I'll wait.


Show me a page # where you can move your models with your fingers.


Riptide Firing Ordnance - can it move? @ 2013/07/25 08:18:29


Post by: Savageconvoy


jdjamesdean@mail.com wrote:


Show me a page # where you can move your models with your fingers.
Doesn't that logic actually go against the permissive ruleset idea?
Rule says you can move models "x" inches. So you assume that because it's a general statement you can move them however you want within the restrictions given, i.e. the "x" inches.


Riptide Firing Ordnance - can it move? @ 2013/07/25 08:30:09


Post by: DeathReaper


 Steel-W0LF wrote:
 DeathReaper wrote:
You can, just not when you fire Ordnance as you have no specific permission to fire any other weapons.

Pinpoint vs Snap Shots is a conflict and Pinpoint specifically addresses Adjusting Snap Shots even though the BRB says nothing can adjust a snap shot.

But a Signum does not specifically mention snap shots so that can not adjust the BS of a snap shot.


"You may fire one additional......" IS permission.


You need specific permission to override a restriction, Therefore "You may fire one additional......" iIS NOT permission

Good day sir.

 Steel-W0LF wrote:
Quote a page number and paragraph for "permissive rule set" please....... I'll wait.


The rules don't say I can't place my models back on the board after you've killed them and use them next turn, but that doesn't mean I can do it. The rules system is permissive: this means you may only do things you are expressly allowed to do or that the rules imply you can do. You are not allowed to do anything else.


Riptide Firing Ordnance - can it move? @ 2013/07/25 08:31:10


Post by: Steel-W0LF


jdjamesdean@mail.com wrote:
 Steel-W0LF wrote:
 DeathReaper wrote:
You can, just not when you fire Ordnance as you have no specific permission to fire any other weapons.

Pinpoint vs Snap Shots is a conflict and Pinpoint specifically addresses Adjusting Snap Shots even though the BRB says nothing can adjust a snap shot.

But a Signum does not specifically mention snap shots so that can not adjust the BS of a snap shot.


"You may fire one additional......" IS permission.

Gnight.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Quote a page number and paragraph for "permissive rule set" please....... I'll wait.


Show me a page # where you can move your models with your fingers.


Thanks for proving my side.

If it was a strict "permissive rule set" you couldn't move your models with your fingers because you don't have permission to.

Swing and a miss.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
 DeathReaper wrote:
 Steel-W0LF wrote:
 DeathReaper wrote:
You can, just not when you fire Ordnance as you have no specific permission to fire any other weapons.

Pinpoint vs Snap Shots is a conflict and Pinpoint specifically addresses Adjusting Snap Shots even though the BRB says nothing can adjust a snap shot.

But a Signum does not specifically mention snap shots so that can not adjust the BS of a snap shot.


"You may fire one additional......" IS permission.


You need specific permission to override a restriction, Therefore "You may fire one additional......" iIS NOT permission

Good day sir.

 Steel-W0LF wrote:
Quote a page number and paragraph for "permissive rule set" please....... I'll wait.


The rules don't say I can't place my models back on the board after you've killed them and use them next turn, but that doesn't mean I can do it. The rules system is permissive: this means you may only do things you are expressly allowed to do or that the rules imply you can do. You are not allowed to do anything else.



Page number and paragraph.

Opinion, hypotheticals, and conjecture will no longer be commented on.

If you can't site rules in the book, you have no argument.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
In other words. What page describes what can and can't over ride a restriction? Page number?


Riptide Firing Ordnance - can it move? @ 2013/07/25 08:37:45


Post by: DeathReaper


There is no page number because being a permissive rule set is how the game is written in order to function without a huge rulebook. It is written this way because in a restrictive ruleset they would need a Rulebook that is three hundred thousand pages long just to restrict you from all of the various things you can not do. Such as: you many not move a model more than 6 inches. you may not throw a model more than 6 inches, you may not use a pencil to move a model more than 6 inches, you may not use the moon to move a model more than 6 inches... Etc.

You seem to have a clear misunderstanding of a permissive ruleset so I do not think there can be a reasonable debate.


Riptide Firing Ordnance - can it move? @ 2013/07/25 08:42:30


Post by: Steel-W0LF


 DeathReaper wrote:
There is no page number because being a permissive rule set is how the game is written in order to function without a huge rulebook. It is written this way because in a restrictive ruleset they would need a Rulebook that is three hundred thousand pages long just to restrict you from all of the various things you can not do. Such as: you many not move a model more than 6 inches. you may not throw a model more than 6 inches, you may not use a pencil to move a model more than 6 inches, you may not use the moon to move a model more than 6 inches... Etc.

You seem to have a clear misunderstanding of a permissive ruleset so I do not think there can be a reasonable debate.


Then quit while you are not ahead.

I have permission to fire or I could not fire ordnance.
I have permission to fire one additional weapon.

I have a rule and pg number that says which takes precedence.

Pg number of the rule that denies the above permissions?


Riptide Firing Ordnance - can it move? @ 2013/07/25 08:54:54


Post by: Unit1126PLL


You have permission to fire Ordnance and no other weapons.

A model could have a piece of wargear that says "this model may fire two thousand weapons in the shooting phase" and firing Ordnance would still not allow it to fire anything else.


Riptide Firing Ordnance - can it move? @ 2013/07/25 08:57:00


Post by: jdjamesdean@mail.com


 Steel-W0LF wrote:
 DeathReaper wrote:
There is no page number because being a permissive rule set is how the game is written in order to function without a huge rulebook. It is written this way because in a restrictive ruleset they would need a Rulebook that is three hundred thousand pages long just to restrict you from all of the various things you can not do. Such as: you many not move a model more than 6 inches. you may not throw a model more than 6 inches, you may not use a pencil to move a model more than 6 inches, you may not use the moon to move a model more than 6 inches... Etc.

You seem to have a clear misunderstanding of a permissive ruleset so I do not think there can be a reasonable debate.


Then quit while you are not ahead.

I have permission to fire or I could not fire ordnance.
I have permission to fire one additional weapon.

I have a rule and pg number that says which takes precedence.

Pg number of the rule that denies the above permissions?


I know it's difficult to understand. It's not like they make things simple.
However you do not have permission to break the ordnance rules.


Riptide Firing Ordnance - can it move? @ 2013/07/25 08:58:44


Post by: Steel-W0LF


 Unit1126PLL wrote:
You have permission to fire Ordnance and no other weapons.

A model could have a piece of wargear that says "this model may fire two thousand weapons in the shooting phase" and firing Ordnance would still not allow it to fire anything else.


What page is this rule on, because page 7 says this is not true. What page says it is?


Automatically Appended Next Post:
jdjamesdean@mail.com wrote:
 Steel-W0LF wrote:
 DeathReaper wrote:
There is no page number because being a permissive rule set is how the game is written in order to function without a huge rulebook. It is written this way because in a restrictive ruleset they would need a Rulebook that is three hundred thousand pages long just to restrict you from all of the various things you can not do. Such as: you many not move a model more than 6 inches. you may not throw a model more than 6 inches, you may not use a pencil to move a model more than 6 inches, you may not use the moon to move a model more than 6 inches... Etc.

You seem to have a clear misunderstanding of a permissive ruleset so I do not think there can be a reasonable debate.


Then quit while you are not ahead.

I have permission to fire or I could not fire ordnance.
I have permission to fire one additional weapon.

I have a rule and pg number that says which takes precedence.

Pg number of the rule that denies the above permissions?


I know it's difficult to understand. It's not like they make things simple.
However you do not have permission to break the ordnance rules.


The codex disagrees.

Cite a rule that says the codex does not over rule the BRB.


Riptide Firing Ordnance - can it move? @ 2013/07/25 09:19:42


Post by: Fandarel


Hm, that is really an interesting discussion.

My Opinion is that "Multitracker" doesn't grant an additional weapons usage.

Why?

First Ordnance Rule disallow it for Non-vehicle (like mentioned in the thread)
Second there is only one exception for this in the BRB. Its in the Vehicle section: Vehicles that firing Ordnance can fire all other Weapons with BS1

This is an Exception to the Ordnance Rule.
Multitracker is not an exception, its an addition to normal shooting,

Both rules are permisions but only the ordnance rule is an exception to the normal rules.




Riptide Firing Ordnance - can it move? @ 2013/07/25 09:42:26


Post by: jdjamesdean@mail.com


 Steel-W0LF wrote:
 Unit1126PLL wrote:
You have permission to fire Ordnance and no other weapons.

A model could have a piece of wargear that says "this model may fire two thousand weapons in the shooting phase" and firing Ordnance would still not allow it to fire anything else.


What page is this rule on, because page 7 says this is not true. What page says it is?


Automatically Appended Next Post:
jdjamesdean@mail.com wrote:
 Steel-W0LF wrote:
 DeathReaper wrote:
There is no page number because being a permissive rule set is how the game is written in order to function without a huge rulebook. It is written this way because in a restrictive ruleset they would need a Rulebook that is three hundred thousand pages long just to restrict you from all of the various things you can not do. Such as: you many not move a model more than 6 inches. you may not throw a model more than 6 inches, you may not use a pencil to move a model more than 6 inches, you may not use the moon to move a model more than 6 inches... Etc.

You seem to have a clear misunderstanding of a permissive ruleset so I do not think there can be a reasonable debate.


Then quit while you are not ahead.

I have permission to fire or I could not fire ordnance.
I have permission to fire one additional weapon.

I have a rule and pg number that says which takes precedence.

Pg number of the rule that denies the above permissions?


I know it's difficult to understand. It's not like they make things simple.
However you do not have permission to break the ordnance rules.


The codex disagrees.

Cite a rule that says the codex does not over rule the BRB.


The rule that says when there is a conflict codex>BRB.
There is no conflict here, so there is no need.


Riptide Firing Ordnance - can it move? @ 2013/07/25 09:51:16


Post by: Mr. Shine


I think the argument for specific permission > restriction alongside advanced > basic is compelling and I certainly cannot disagree with using it in practice, though I won't argue for it as a basis of what the rules say.

When you have one side arguing on how a rule should be interpreted versus the other arguing on following what the rules say you may be hard-pressed to find agreement


Riptide Firing Ordnance - can it move? @ 2013/07/25 12:29:30


Post by: rigeld2


 Steel-W0LF wrote:

To use you assault example:

If there was a piece of wargear that said "you can assault an additional 6" in your assault phase" and you arrived from reserve, you could not assault as you are not allowed to assault at all.

You can fire one additional weapon except you're not allowed to fire any weapons at all (once you've fired Ordnance).
You still don't understand how a permissive rules set works (which is doubly demonstrated by demanding a page number), you still haven't shown a conflict (like Relentless and Ordnance, or Vanguard Vets and assaulting after Reserves).

You've failed to show a conflict since page 1 of this thread - instead you keep quoting a rule that literally does not apply and show that you do not understand one of the basic requirements for rules for a game to work.
It seems like you're getting worked up about this situation (insinuating bias, etc). Step back, calm down, and look at everything objectively.

Also, isn't Multi-tracker part of the suit and not optional?


Riptide Firing Ordnance - can it move? @ 2013/07/25 12:47:23


Post by: rogueeyes


For those stating an ordnance weapon is more specific than a model with a multitracker I ask this: who has multitrackers? Who has ordnance weapons?

Only tau have multitrackers but everyone has ordnance weapons so multitrackers are a more specific codex oriented rule. This thus overrides the amount of shot and creates a direct conflict on how many weapons a model may fire. This is not a stat and thus the order of operations for stats do not apply ... codex vs rulebook applies since the two rules conflict with one another.

Do not apply rules that are for certain things to other things. Stat modifier rules cannot be applied to a codex/rulebook conflict to decide order of operations. If it was a strength or toughness question then it would be allowed but it is not and that is the flaw of the set modifier argument.


Riptide Firing Ordnance - can it move? @ 2013/07/25 12:55:42


Post by: Spetulhu


rogueeyes wrote:
For those stating an ordnance weapon is more specific than a model with a multitracker I ask this: who has multitrackers? Who has ordnance weapons?

Only tau have multitrackers but everyone has ordnance weapons.


That's not how it works. If it did an Ork Warboss with an Attack Squig (gives him one extra CC attack) could use two grenades in the assault phase since his Codex gives him +1 where BRB grendaes gives him 1 total.

Restrictions must override permissions unless specifically mentioned in order for the system to work at all.


Riptide Firing Ordnance - can it move? @ 2013/07/25 12:56:14


Post by: rigeld2


The rules in question do not conflict.

For rules to conflict they have to directly contradict each other (cf Relentless vs Ordnance, any of the Flying Transports vs the Zoom rule, Ymgarls vs assaulting from Reserves, Drop Pods vs mishaps, etc).

There's no contradiction here. I've asked, repeatedly, for it to be shown and been ignored. I've just been told to find the page number for a permissive rules set, that there is a conflict because we're debating (ummm... No), that I'm biased and hate Tau, that somehow a vehicle specific rule that literally spells out how it works with Ordnance and allows Snap Shots is somehow inconsistent with the Multi-tracker rules, that the Multi-tracker is an optional upgrade on the Riptide (when iirc it's part of the Battle Suit rules and therefore not optional)... In other words, a whole lot of other things than showing a conflict. It's not enough to assert there is one, you have to prove it.


Riptide Firing Ordnance - can it move? @ 2013/07/25 14:45:21


Post by: Lord Yayula


It must be fun playing a game with Steel-W0lf definition of conflict between rules. Maybe then my Mark of Slaanesh would be useful.

This additional shot being restricted by a completely independent rule is the same case as assaulting without grenades or even with an unwieldy weapon and having something in your codex that makes you hit at +1 Ini.

By steel standards it seems like you can get to hit axes and PF at I2. Since even thou the BRB says they strike at I1, since my codex wargear gives me a good +1 Initiative and that obviously is in conflict with my initiative sequence my codex wins and I get to strike before other unwieldy bearers... awesome.


Riptide Firing Ordnance - can it move? @ 2013/07/25 14:49:02


Post by: thejughead


rigeld2 wrote:
The rules in question do not conflict.
In other words, a whole lot of other things than showing a conflict. It's not enough to assert there is one, you have to prove it.


The rules do conflict. The above posters continue to cite why they do and you continue to dismiss their arguments. Codex Tau gives you permission to fire an additional weapon vs. Ordnance rule that says you cannot.

Please state where the BRB or FAQ says "This is a permissive rule set". Also, please state where there is a definition of general vs. specific rules in the BRB. The only ones that are defined that I know of are Basic, Advanced, and Codex.


Riptide Firing Ordnance - can it move? @ 2013/07/25 14:54:53


Post by: Trasvi


How about some slightly different situations:

If you are immobilised, but have an ability that lets you move an additional inch, can you move?
If you are prevented from attacking, but you have wargear which lets you make an additional attack, how many attacks do you have?
If you are in combat and cannot shoot, but you have wargear which lets you fire an additional weapon, how many weapons can you fire?

The word *cannot* is the same for not being able to shoot while in combat, and for not being able to shoot other weapons after shooting ordnance. The same end result applies. 'Cannot' is the strongest word in a permissive rule set, and only conflicts with 'must'.

Spoiler:

From a linguistic perspective, it is a bit funny. Can you have additional, when you haven't had any?
See Lewis Caroll's take on this:
`Take some more tea,' the March Hare said to Alice, very earnestly.
`I've had nothing yet,' Alice replied in an offended tone, `so I can't take more.'
`You mean you can't take less,' said the Hatter: `it's very easy to take more than nothing.'

Its a funny thing, when the 'strict wording' can sometimes mean something different to the 'common use'. But only one actually makes sense as an extensible rules interpretation.


Riptide Firing Ordnance - can it move? @ 2013/07/25 14:56:22


Post by: Tactical_Genius


 thejughead wrote:
rigeld2 wrote:
The rules in question do not conflict.
In other words, a whole lot of other things than showing a conflict. It's not enough to assert there is one, you have to prove it.


The rules do conflict. The above posters continue to cite why they do and you continue to dismiss their arguments. Codex Tau gives you permission to fire an additional weapon vs. Ordnance rule that says you cannot.

Please state where the BRB or FAQ says "This is a permissive rule set". Also, please state where there is a definition of general vs. specific rules in the BRB. The only ones that are defined that I know of are Basic, Advanced, and Codex.

It is a permissive ruleset because all games are. Otherwise people could jump up and down on your models screaming "IT DOESN'T SAY I CAN'T" at you. If you are going to pretend it isn't a permissive ruleset, the game falls apart.


Riptide Firing Ordnance - can it move? @ 2013/07/25 15:04:39


Post by: thejughead


Trasvi wrote:
How about some slightly different situations:

If you are immobilised, but have an ability that lets you move an additional inch, can you move?
If you are prevented from attacking, but you have wargear which lets you make an additional attack, how many attacks do you have?
If you are in combat and cannot shoot, but you have wargear which lets you fire an additional weapon, how many weapons can you fire?

The word *cannot* is the same for not being able to shoot while in combat, and for not being able to shoot other weapons after shooting ordnance. The same end result applies. 'Cannot' is the strongest word in a permissive rule set, and only conflicts with 'must'.

we change to a different situation, same wording.

A model



If you are immobilised, but have an ability that lets you move an additional inch, can you move? No conflict here because you could not move in the first place. To get the additional inch you would have to allowed to move.

If you are prevented from attacking, but you have wargear which lets you make an additional attack, how many attacks do you have? If the model is prevented from making even one attack then yes you cannot attack. Not the case in dispute where the model has already fired a weapon that restricts another and conflicts with a wargear that allows another to be fired.

If you are in combat and cannot shoot, but you have wargear which lets you fire an additional weapon, how many weapons can you fire? No conflict here either. In combat suggests the assault phase and not shooting.




Riptide Firing Ordnance - can it move? @ 2013/07/25 15:06:09


Post by: easysauce


if all a model needed to fire ordanace + another weapon was permission to shoot more then one gun at a time,
then EVERY monster and tank can fire ordanance + other weapons, since they have permission to fire more then one weapon.

but we all know this is not the case, as being allowed to shoot 2, 3, 4 or even a million weapons, does not overide that if you shoot ordinance, you dont get to shoot other weapons.

there are specific rules about ordinance (ie heavy vehicles) that get around this, and they make very specific reference to ordinance, which multi tracker does not.

every single vehicle can fire more then one weapon, adding one more allowable weapon to that # does not overide the ordinance rules, otherwise every vehicle can fire ordinance and other weapons, simply because it can fire more then one weapon already.


Riptide Firing Ordnance - can it move? @ 2013/07/25 15:08:01


Post by: thejughead


Tactical_Genius wrote:
 thejughead wrote:
rigeld2 wrote:
The rules in question do not conflict.
In other words, a whole lot of other things than showing a conflict. It's not enough to assert there is one, you have to prove it.


The rules do conflict. The above posters continue to cite why they do and you continue to dismiss their arguments. Codex Tau gives you permission to fire an additional weapon vs. Ordnance rule that says you cannot.

Please state where the BRB or FAQ says "This is a permissive rule set". Also, please state where there is a definition of general vs. specific rules in the BRB. The only ones that are defined that I know of are Basic, Advanced, and Codex.

It is a permissive ruleset because all games are. Otherwise people could jump up and down on your models screaming "IT DOESN'T SAY I CAN'T" at you. If you are going to pretend it isn't a permissive ruleset, the game falls apart.


I can accept that as valid for complete chaos purposes, but general vs. specific is nowhere to be found except in opinions.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
 easysauce wrote:
if all a model needed to fire ordanace + another weapon was permission to shoot more then one gun at a time,
then EVERY monster and tank can fire ordanance + other weapons, since they have permission to fire more then one weapon.

but we all know this is not the case, as being allowed to shoot 2, 3, 4 or even a million weapons, does not overide that if you shoot ordinance, you dont get to shoot other weapons.

there are specific rules about ordinance (ie heavy vehicles) that get around this, and they make very specific reference to ordinance, which multi tracker does not.

every single vehicle can fire more then one weapon, adding one more allowable weapon to that # does not overide the ordinance rules, otherwise every vehicle can fire ordinance and other weapons, simply because it can fire more then one weapon already.


I dont think that was the argument. MC can fire 2 because the rule in the BRB. Ordnance disallows another weapon in the BRB. Both rules conflict but they are in the BRB and Ordnance wins. Multitracker grants another weapon in the Codex. If Codex > BRB and these rules conflict is the argument.


Riptide Firing Ordnance - can it move? @ 2013/07/25 15:13:57


Post by: hyv3mynd


Trasvi wrote:
How about some slightly different situations:

If you are immobilised, but have an ability that lets you move an additional inch, can you move?
If you are prevented from attacking, but you have wargear which lets you make an additional attack, how many attacks do you have?
If you are in combat and cannot shoot, but you have wargear which lets you fire an additional weapon, how many weapons can you fire?

The word *cannot* is the same for not being able to shoot while in combat, and for not being able to shoot other weapons after shooting ordnance. The same end result applies. 'Cannot' is the strongest word in a permissive rule set, and only conflicts with 'must'.










we change to a different situation, same wording.

A model


This.

Ordnance doesn't reduce you to 0, it forbids firing another weapon altogether. To create a conflict that favors the codex, you need direct reference such as:

Snap shots may never be modified above bs1, pinpoint rule allows increasing snapshot bs. Specific conflict of the BRB allows codex to win out. Otherwise, auspex, Telion, and any other modifier in a codex would modify snap shots "just because codex > BRB". You need a verbal conflict which multi-tracker lacks. If it said "one additional weapon, including when firing ordnance" then there would be a conflict favoring the codex.

Units arriving from reserves may not assault, ymgarl's dormant rule specifically allows them to assault when they arrive. Verbal conflict favoring the codex. Without this, assault ramps and open topped vehicles in a codex would allow units to assault out of reserves "just because codex > BRB". You need a verbal conflict which multi-tracker lacks. If it said "one additional weapon, including when firing ordnance" then there would be a conflict favoring the codex.

People stating that "+1 weapon" overrides the ordnance ban would create more problems then those being solved.


Riptide Firing Ordnance - can it move? @ 2013/07/25 15:15:21


Post by: rigeld2


 thejughead wrote:
Tactical_Genius wrote:
 thejughead wrote:
rigeld2 wrote:
The rules in question do not conflict.
In other words, a whole lot of other things than showing a conflict. It's not enough to assert there is one, you have to prove it.


The rules do conflict. The above posters continue to cite why they do and you continue to dismiss their arguments. Codex Tau gives you permission to fire an additional weapon vs. Ordnance rule that says you cannot.

Please state where the BRB or FAQ says "This is a permissive rule set". Also, please state where there is a definition of general vs. specific rules in the BRB. The only ones that are defined that I know of are Basic, Advanced, and Codex.

It is a permissive ruleset because all games are. Otherwise people could jump up and down on your models screaming "IT DOESN'T SAY I CAN'T" at you. If you are going to pretend it isn't a permissive ruleset, the game falls apart.


I can accept that as valid for complete chaos purposes, but general vs. specific is nowhere to be found except in opinions.

If you cannot accept a basic premise for the rules to be allowed to work, then please don't participate further. I'm not asking that to be insulting - I'm asking because it's literally impossible to have a proper debate without that basic knowledge.


Riptide Firing Ordnance - can it move? @ 2013/07/25 15:21:41


Post by: Tactical_Genius


 thejughead wrote:
I can accept that as valid for complete chaos purposes, but general vs. specific is nowhere to be found except in opinions.

General vs. Specific is another feature of all permissive rulesets. For example, I have a pinned unit. I then attempt to move it 6", because "the rulebook says all units can move 6" in the movement phase". If we didn't have specific vs. general, we would have no way to resolve normal movement vs. pinned (ie no movement).

I also have an example akin to the original argument:
An ork vehicle with a red paint job (may move an additional 1" in the movement phase).
Ork vehicle moves 3", hits dangerous terrain, fails test, is immobilised. According to you it can then move another 1".


Riptide Firing Ordnance - can it move? @ 2013/07/25 15:26:25


Post by: Dracos


Trasvi wrote:
How about some slightly different situations:

If you are immobilised, but have an ability that lets you move an additional inch, can you move?


I think this is the best analogy.

An Ork trukk with red paint job is immobilized. It can move an additional inch without counting as moving an additional inch. Yet, since it is immobilized, it still can not move at all - even that inch that doesn't count as an inch.

When you fire ordinance as a non-vehicle, regardless of how many other weapons you would normally be able to fire, you are restricted from firing any other weapons.

The game system does not work at all if codex always trumps rulebook in every instance (without direct conflict). This is easy to demonstrate. In my Codex: Space Marines, a Space Marine has a 3+ armour save. If you shoot it with a plasmagun (ap2) it does not get an armour save. However, since my Codex says I get a 3+ armour save, under the mistaken reading of the rules I would still get that 3+ because its in the Codex.

This is not how the rules work. Only if my codex said something to the effect of "may take armour saves even against weapons which would normally ignore it" would the rulebook be overridden.

This has been pointed out by many posters here. I feel like those arguing that Riptides can fire ordinance plus another weapon are really just not trying to understand what others are saying - its quite clear how this works.


Riptide Firing Ordnance - can it move? @ 2013/07/25 15:26:59


Post by: thejughead


rigeld2 wrote:
 thejughead wrote:
Tactical_Genius wrote:
 thejughead wrote:
rigeld2 wrote:
The rules in question do not conflict.
In other words, a whole lot of other things than showing a conflict. It's not enough to assert there is one, you have to prove it.


The rules do conflict. The above posters continue to cite why they do and you continue to dismiss their arguments. Codex Tau gives you permission to fire an additional weapon vs. Ordnance rule that says you cannot.

Please state where the BRB or FAQ says "This is a permissive rule set". Also, please state where there is a definition of general vs. specific rules in the BRB. The only ones that are defined that I know of are Basic, Advanced, and Codex.

It is a permissive ruleset because all games are. Otherwise people could jump up and down on your models screaming "IT DOESN'T SAY I CAN'T" at you. If you are going to pretend it isn't a permissive ruleset, the game falls apart.


I can accept that as valid for complete chaos purposes, but general vs. specific is nowhere to be found except in opinions.

If you cannot accept a basic premise for the rules to be allowed to work, then please don't participate further. I'm not asking that to be insulting - I'm asking because it's literally impossible to have a proper debate without that basic knowledge.


I am free to voice my opinion in this forum. If you do not like it the you can "ignore" me. Is that permissive enough.


Riptide Firing Ordnance - can it move? @ 2013/07/25 15:28:18


Post by: DiabloSpawn33


Riptide can fire 2 weapons for being a monstrous creature.

Fires ordinance, so it only permitted to fire that one weapon.

However multitracker says one more weapon than normally permitted can be fired. Thus a contradiction in rules, ordinance says permitted no other weapons can be fired, multitracker allows more more than normally permitted to be fired.

If you are normally permitted to fire only the ordinance weapon because of ordinance rules, it seems that 1 + 1 = 2, no?

I fail to see how the cannot be a contradiction. Permitted 1 in BRB, permitted one extra than normal in codex.


Riptide Firing Ordnance - can it move? @ 2013/07/25 15:29:34


Post by: Ghaz


 thejughead wrote:
No conflict here because you could not move in the first place. To get the additional inch you would have to allowed to move.

And you have an actual rules quote to back up that claim, or is it just supposition on your part?

Mr. Shine has the same problem with his argument against the multi-tracker and running. The rules for the multi-tracker do not say that you can only fire an additional weapon if you can fire a weapon in the first place, so why the restriction that does not exist? 0+1=1.


Riptide Firing Ordnance - can it move? @ 2013/07/25 15:29:39


Post by: thejughead


Tactical_Genius wrote:
 thejughead wrote:
I can accept that as valid for complete chaos purposes, but general vs. specific is nowhere to be found except in opinions.

General vs. Specific is another feature of all permissive rulesets. For example, I have a pinned unit. I then attempt to move it 6", because "the rulebook says all units can move 6" in the movement phase". If we didn't have specific vs. general, we would have no way to resolve normal movement vs. pinned (ie no movement).

I also have an example akin to the original argument:
An ork vehicle with a red paint job (may move an additional 1" in the movement phase).
Ork vehicle moves 3", hits dangerous terrain, fails test, is immobilised. According to you it can then move another 1".


Thank you. I appreciate the walk through. I have to lean towards disallowing it then.


Riptide Firing Ordnance - can it move? @ 2013/07/25 15:30:20


Post by: hyv3mynd


DiabloSpawn33 wrote:
Riptide can fire 2 weapons for being a monstrous creature.

Fires ordinance, so it only permitted to fire that one weapon.

However multitracker says one more weapon than normally permitted can be fired. Thus a contradiction in rules, ordinance says permitted no other weapons can be fired, multitracker allows more more than normally permitted to be fired.

If you are normally permitted to fire only the ordinance weapon because of ordinance rules, it seems that 1 + 1 = 2, no?

I fail to see how the cannot be a contradiction. Permitted 1 in BRB, permitted one extra than normal in codex.


PoTMS has similar wording, yet you are not allowed to use it to "fire one additional weapon" in situations where firing is forbidden altogether.


Riptide Firing Ordnance - can it move? @ 2013/07/25 15:30:31


Post by: Dracos


In the same way that the rulebook says Ap2 ignores armour, but my Codex space marines says I get a 3+ armour. IF that is a conflict (its not) then codex > rulebook and I get the 3+ anyways.


Riptide Firing Ordnance - can it move? @ 2013/07/25 15:32:38


Post by: thejughead


 Ghaz wrote:
 thejughead wrote:
No conflict here because you could not move in the first place. To get the additional inch you would have to allowed to move.

And you have an actual rules quote to back up that claim, or is it just supposition on your part?

Mr. Shine has the same problem with his argument against the multi-tracker and running. The rules for the multi-tracker do not say that you can only fire an additional weapon if you can fire a weapon in the first place, so why the restriction that does not exist? 0+1=1.


Tactical Genius and Dracos both gave examples where that falls apart.


Riptide Firing Ordnance - can it move? @ 2013/07/25 15:33:46


Post by: quirthanon


 hyv3mynd wrote:

Snap shots may never be modified above bs1, pinpoint rule allows increasing snapshot bs. Specific conflict of the BRB allows codex to win out.

This is not a conflict, this is an example of a specific explicit permission to alter or ignore the BRB rule. If this was always required then there would be no conflicts, as it'd be explicitly stated what the result should be.

 hyv3mynd wrote:

Otherwise, auspex, Telion, and any other modifier in a codex would modify snap shots "just because codex > BRB".

And until the FAQ disallowing these, they did have a conflict that was overridden by Codex > BRB. However, it’s the FAQ ruling that really changed these, not the lack of any specific text.

 hyv3mynd wrote:

You need a verbal conflict which multi-tracker lacks. If it said "one additional weapon, including when firing ordnance" then there would be a conflict favoring the codex.


Where is the text calling for the verbal conflict? This is the section that states Codex > BRB when a conflict arises. It does not define or restrict what a conflict is, nor does it require specific text in the codex rules to create a conflict.

BASIC VERSUS ADVANCED [BRB pg 7, 4th paragraph]: On rare occasions, a conflict will arise between a rule in this rulebook, and one printed in a codex. Where this occurs, the rule printed in the codex always takes precedence.

So, the Multi-Tracker does not need to specifically mention the ordnance rule to have a conflict with it.


Riptide Firing Ordnance - can it move? @ 2013/07/25 15:35:46


Post by: Dracos


The problem is that with your application of that rule, as have many people demonstrated, the rules cease to function at all.

It simply doesn't work that way.


Riptide Firing Ordnance - can it move? @ 2013/07/25 15:45:30


Post by: DiabloSpawn33


I would agree with the sentiment if it were forbidding firing all together, however you are still allowed to fire something, the ordinance weapon in question, just no more.

Since you still have permission to fire weapons, and the special rule of ordinance is preventing you from firing further weapons, you should still be able to fire an additional weapon with multitracker as it directly contradicts that rule.

Although in cases where you cannot fire at all (locked in combat, etc.) then I agree multitracker does nothing.


Riptide Firing Ordnance - can it move? @ 2013/07/25 15:46:43


Post by: Ghaz


 thejughead wrote:
 Ghaz wrote:
 thejughead wrote:
No conflict here because you could not move in the first place. To get the additional inch you would have to allowed to move.

And you have an actual rules quote to back up that claim, or is it just supposition on your part?

Mr. Shine has the same problem with his argument against the multi-tracker and running. The rules for the multi-tracker do not say that you can only fire an additional weapon if you can fire a weapon in the first place, so why the restriction that does not exist? 0+1=1.


Tactical Genius and Dracos both gave examples where that falls apart.

And I'm showing you why your specific argument that you presented there falls apart, just as Mr. Shines argument falls apart. If you allow the additional weapon to be fired with ordnance then you have to allow it to be fired while running because there's nothing saying that you can only fire the additional weapon if you could fire in the first place. It's a restriction which doesn't exist and thus invalidates their entire position.

If you read the rest of the thread you'll notice that I agree with those saying that the multi-tracker does not allow you to fire another weapon with an ordnance weapon.


Riptide Firing Ordnance - can it move? @ 2013/07/25 15:46:55


Post by: rigeld2


quirthanon wrote:
 hyv3mynd wrote:

Snap shots may never be modified above bs1, pinpoint rule allows increasing snapshot bs. Specific conflict of the BRB allows codex to win out.

This is not a conflict, this is an example of a specific explicit permission to alter or ignore the BRB rule. If this was always required then there would be no conflicts, as it'd be explicitly stated what the result should be.

Actually it's the definition of a conflict.
You have two rules that cannot both be applied. How do you resolve that? Please do so without referencing anything like specific overrides general, or the rules on page 7. Please use rules support and don't fall back on "common sense".

Once you understand how a permissive rules set must work, you'll understand why the situation in the quote is a conflict and the Multi-Tracker vs Ordnance is not.


Riptide Firing Ordnance - can it move? @ 2013/07/25 15:50:21


Post by: hyv3mynd


quirthanon wrote:
 hyv3mynd wrote:

Snap shots may never be modified above bs1, pinpoint rule allows increasing snapshot bs. Specific conflict of the BRB allows codex to win out.

This is not a conflict, this is an example of a specific explicit permission to alter or ignore the BRB rule. If this was always required then there would be no conflicts, as it'd be explicitly stated what the result should be.

 hyv3mynd wrote:

Otherwise, auspex, Telion, and any other modifier in a codex would modify snap shots "just because codex > BRB".

And until the FAQ disallowing these, they did have a conflict that was overridden by Codex > BRB. However, it’s the FAQ ruling that really changed these, not the lack of any specific text.

 hyv3mynd wrote:

You need a verbal conflict which multi-tracker lacks. If it said "one additional weapon, including when firing ordnance" then there would be a conflict favoring the codex.


Where is the text calling for the verbal conflict? This is the section that states Codex > BRB when a conflict arises. It does not define or restrict what a conflict is, nor does it require specific text in the codex rules to create a conflict.

BASIC VERSUS ADVANCED [BRB pg 7, 4th paragraph]: On rare occasions, a conflict will arise between a rule in this rulebook, and one printed in a codex. Where this occurs, the rule printed in the codex always takes precedence.

So, the Multi-Tracker does not need to specifically mention the ordnance rule to have a conflict with it.


So:

Ork vehicle upgrade RPJ allows the vehicle to move +1". BRB mission The Relic forbids an embarked unit from moving more than 6". In your view an embarked unit carrying the relic on a RPJ trukk can move 7"?

Eldar jetbikes can move 12" in the assault phase. In your view, they can carry the relic more than 6" also?


Riptide Firing Ordnance - can it move? @ 2013/07/25 15:50:39


Post by: thejughead


 Ghaz wrote:
 thejughead wrote:
 Ghaz wrote:
 thejughead wrote:
No conflict here because you could not move in the first place. To get the additional inch you would have to allowed to move.

And you have an actual rules quote to back up that claim, or is it just supposition on your part?

Mr. Shine has the same problem with his argument against the multi-tracker and running. The rules for the multi-tracker do not say that you can only fire an additional weapon if you can fire a weapon in the first place, so why the restriction that does not exist? 0+1=1.


Tactical Genius and Dracos both gave examples where that falls apart.

And I'm showing you why your specific argument that you presented there falls apart, just as Mr. Shines argument falls apart. If you allow the additional weapon to be fired with ordnance then you have to allow it to be fired while running because there's nothing saying that you can only fire the additional weapon if you could fire in the first place. It's a restriction which doesn't exist and thus invalidates their entire position.

If you read the rest of the thread you'll notice that I agree with those saying that the multi-tracker does not allow you to fire another weapon with an ordnance weapon.


Ghaz, I meant my argument falls apart.


Riptide Firing Ordnance - can it move? @ 2013/07/25 16:04:35


Post by: Rorschach9


My thought on the matter :

I have Multitracker : My Riptide can fire 3 weapons in his shooting phase (granted when the list was created and the models fielded).

I choose to fire an Ordnance weapon. Ordnance has now removed the ability to fire any further weapons that shooting phase (allowance to fire +1 weapon granted by multitracker or any other wargear/special ability has been thus removed by a specific ruling).

Multitracker is a piece of wargear. It has an ongoing effect that begins when you field your army. It doesn't come into effect at some later time. Therefore, when Ordnance comes into effect, it strips that allowance.



Automatically Appended Next Post:
As for the OP's question about moving/shooting ordnance with a Riptide;

Yes, the Riptide can move and shoot ordnance in the same turn due to Relentless.


Riptide Firing Ordnance - can it move? @ 2013/07/25 16:31:43


Post by: Steel-W0LF


rigeld2 wrote:
quirthanon wrote:
 hyv3mynd wrote:

Snap shots may never be modified above bs1, pinpoint rule allows increasing snapshot bs. Specific conflict of the BRB allows codex to win out.

This is not a conflict, this is an example of a specific explicit permission to alter or ignore the BRB rule. If this was always required then there would be no conflicts, as it'd be explicitly stated what the result should be.

Actually it's the definition of a conflict.
You have two rules that cannot both be applied. How do you resolve that? Please do so without referencing anything like specific overrides general, or the rules on page 7. Please use rules support and don't fall back on "common sense".

Once you understand how a permissive rules set must work, you'll understand why the situation in the quote is a conflict and the Multi-Tracker vs Ordnance is not.

I love the "I'm smart, if only you were not stupid you'd understand" arguments.

They are classy.


Riptide Firing Ordnance - can it move? @ 2013/07/25 16:34:58


Post by: DeathReaper


1) He did not say that.

2) The permissive ruleset can be tricky and people can miss things.


Riptide Firing Ordnance - can it move? @ 2013/07/25 16:36:59


Post by: illuknisaa


If my model has a powerfist, boltgun and multitracker can I shoot my powerfist as an additional weapon?


Riptide Firing Ordnance - can it move? @ 2013/07/25 16:39:53


Post by: cormadepanda


I too see the logic of the ordinance rule. Its really obvious, if you don't see the logic you should really slow down and open your mind to the possibility you are wrong.

So here is the logic, which is good and flows well.


Multi-targeting doohickey allows one ADDITIONAL weapon to be fired.

Ordinance says that no ADDITIONAL weapons can be fired. If the Multi-target doohickey which is described as an additional weapon permitted to shoot, then It may not be fired. It was classified under the explicit clause of the rule of Ordnance to dismantle its ability.

You can't jump over that it says additional in anyway, you can use different words that mean additional, but so can Ordinance. Ordinance catches your rule, you lose your weapon. Sorry rip tide, but if you shoot big you lose your secondary weapons.


Riptide Firing Ordnance - can it move? @ 2013/07/25 16:45:49


Post by: rigeld2


 Steel-W0LF wrote:
rigeld2 wrote:
quirthanon wrote:
 hyv3mynd wrote:

Snap shots may never be modified above bs1, pinpoint rule allows increasing snapshot bs. Specific conflict of the BRB allows codex to win out.

This is not a conflict, this is an example of a specific explicit permission to alter or ignore the BRB rule. If this was always required then there would be no conflicts, as it'd be explicitly stated what the result should be.

Actually it's the definition of a conflict.
You have two rules that cannot both be applied. How do you resolve that? Please do so without referencing anything like specific overrides general, or the rules on page 7. Please use rules support and don't fall back on "common sense".

Once you understand how a permissive rules set must work, you'll understand why the situation in the quote is a conflict and the Multi-Tracker vs Ordnance is not.

I love the "I'm smart, if only you were not stupid you'd understand" arguments.

They are classy.

I've never said you were stupid. Ever. I can't recall every saying it to someone on this board - I'm sure I'd have been warned by a mod if I had.
All I said in that quote is that it is obvious the poster did not understand how a permissive rules set works. I gave him a task to help him understand.

Have you come up with a rules argument yet?


Riptide Firing Ordnance - can it move? @ 2013/07/25 16:58:28


Post by: Steel-W0LF


rigeld2 wrote:
 Steel-W0LF wrote:
rigeld2 wrote:
quirthanon wrote:
 hyv3mynd wrote:

Snap shots may never be modified above bs1, pinpoint rule allows increasing snapshot bs. Specific conflict of the BRB allows codex to win out.

This is not a conflict, this is an example of a specific explicit permission to alter or ignore the BRB rule. If this was always required then there would be no conflicts, as it'd be explicitly stated what the result should be.

Actually it's the definition of a conflict.
You have two rules that cannot both be applied. How do you resolve that? Please do so without referencing anything like specific overrides general, or the rules on page 7. Please use rules support and don't fall back on "common sense".

Once you understand how a permissive rules set must work, you'll understand why the situation in the quote is a conflict and the Multi-Tracker vs Ordnance is not.

I love the "I'm smart, if only you were not stupid you'd understand" arguments.

They are classy.

I've never said you were stupid. Ever. I can't recall every saying it to someone on this board - I'm sure I'd have been warned by a mod if I had.
All I said in that quote is that it is obvious the poster did not understand how a permissive rules set works. I gave him a task to help him understand.

Have you come up with a rules argument yet?


Ahh well maybe once you are able to understand the language better you'll understand.....


Riptide Firing Ordnance - can it move? @ 2013/07/25 17:04:42


Post by: reds8n


We can do without comments of this nature.

Thank you.


Riptide Firing Ordnance - can it move? @ 2013/07/25 17:16:16


Post by: Steel-W0LF


It really boils down to this:

Until you get a FAQ to say otherwise, like in most of the examples sited, the codex wins.

There is no place the rule book lists when the codex does not over rule the BRB. Half of the examples beople come up with are irrelevant because they fail to use "additional" properly.

The running and firing? Cant happen. In order to fire an "additional" weapon, you would have to fire a weapon in the first place.

The closest example that does work is the red paint job and the immobilized result. In this example, at least you were allowed to move in the first place, yet something stopped you. Ignoring common sense, this would be the same argument rules wise.


Riptide Firing Ordnance - can it move? @ 2013/07/25 17:17:37


Post by: Dracos


My codex says my marines have a 3+ save, so that overrules the rulebook saying ap2 ignores armour saves?

edit: This is an extension of the way you are interpreting codex > rulebook. Once you understand why you still don't get the 3+ armour save against AP2 despite the rulebook and codex telling you seemingly different things, you will see why multitrackers don't overrule Ordinance.

edit2: Also note that Tau are my primary army right now, and i use a riptide. I have skin in this game, and its on the opposite side to the one that I see as being correct.


Riptide Firing Ordnance - can it move? @ 2013/07/25 17:19:55


Post by: agnosto


GW has an established track record of breaking its own rules in FAQs which wouldn't be possible if the darn rules actually said what was meant.

Like the rumor thread, someone should keep track of how GW rules on some of these contentious issues just to see how consistent they are.


Riptide Firing Ordnance - can it move? @ 2013/07/25 17:25:47


Post by: Steel-W0LF


 Dracos wrote:
My codex says my marines have a 3+ save, so that overrules the rulebook saying ap2 ignores armour saves?

edit: This is an extension of the way you are interpreting codex > rulebook. Once you understand why you still don't get the 3+ armour save against AP2 despite the rulebook and codex telling you seemingly different things, you will see why multitrackers don't overrule Ordinance.


Except for AGAIN:

AP2 vs 3+ implies you get zero armor saves at all.


You are already firing a weapon when you fire ordinance, you have not been disallowed from firing at all, you just cant fire any more. Which the Tau rule directly contradicts. If you were in a situation where something was saying you could not fire anything at all, and were trying to use the multi tracker to fire 1, your example would be correct, and you wouldn't be allowed to do it. But thats not the case.


Riptide Firing Ordnance - can it move? @ 2013/07/25 17:28:24


Post by: Dracos


I'm sorry I can't help you understand. I tried.


Riptide Firing Ordnance - can it move? @ 2013/07/25 17:35:32


Post by: DeathReaper


 Steel-W0LF wrote:
It really boils down to this:

Until you get a FAQ to say otherwise, like in most of the examples sited, the codex wins.

Codex only wins if there is a conflict.

There is no direct conflict.

The Multi-tracker would need to say: Even when firing ordnance, for there to be a conflict.


Riptide Firing Ordnance - can it move? @ 2013/07/25 17:37:59


Post by: Dracos


 DeathReaper wrote:
 Steel-W0LF wrote:
It really boils down to this:

Until you get a FAQ to say otherwise, like in most of the examples sited, the codex wins.

Codex only wins if there is a conflict.

There is no direct conflict.

The Multi-tracker would need to say: Even when firing ordnance, for there to be a conflict.


This a million times.


Riptide Firing Ordnance - can it move? @ 2013/07/25 17:46:28


Post by: Steel-W0LF


 DeathReaper wrote:
 Steel-W0LF wrote:
It really boils down to this:

Until you get a FAQ to say otherwise, like in most of the examples sited, the codex wins.

Codex only wins if there is a conflict.

There is no direct conflict.

The Multi-tracker would need to say: Even when firing ordnance, for there to be a conflict.


Thats not the rule thats written, and there is no written rule about "direct" conflict.


Riptide Firing Ordnance - can it move? @ 2013/07/25 17:47:32


Post by: rigeld2


 Steel-W0LF wrote:
It really boils down to this:

Until you get a FAQ to say otherwise, like in most of the examples sited, the codex wins.

There is no place the rule book lists when the codex does not over rule the BRB. Half of the examples beople come up with are irrelevant because they fail to use "additional" properly.

The running and firing? Cant happen. In order to fire an "additional" weapon, you would have to fire a weapon in the first place.

The closest example that does work is the red paint job and the immobilized result. In this example, at least you were allowed to move in the first place, yet something stopped you. Ignoring common sense, this would be the same argument rules wise.

So, rules wise, you're able to shoot an infinite amount of times yet something stops you.
Unless you're saying that RPJ allows an immobilized vehicle to move 1"/turn.

Still no actual rules cited. Still showing a misunderstanding of a permissive rules set and how they work. Still not understanding how specific vs general actually works.


Riptide Firing Ordnance - can it move? @ 2013/07/25 17:49:59


Post by: Steel-W0LF


rigeld2 wrote:
 Steel-W0LF wrote:
It really boils down to this:

Until you get a FAQ to say otherwise, like in most of the examples sited, the codex wins.

There is no place the rule book lists when the codex does not over rule the BRB. Half of the examples beople come up with are irrelevant because they fail to use "additional" properly.

The running and firing? Cant happen. In order to fire an "additional" weapon, you would have to fire a weapon in the first place.

The closest example that does work is the red paint job and the immobilized result. In this example, at least you were allowed to move in the first place, yet something stopped you. Ignoring common sense, this would be the same argument rules wise.

So, rules wise, you're able to shoot an infinite amount of times yet something stops you.
Unless you're saying that RPJ allows an immobilized vehicle to move 1"/turn.

Still no actual rules cited. Still showing a misunderstanding of a permissive rules set and how they work. Still not understanding how specific vs general actually works.


Do you have permission to fire? Yes... If no you wouldnt be firing ordinance.
Do you have permission to fire additional weapon?
BRB says No
Codex says Yes.


You know the rest, you got nothing to fall back on.


Riptide Firing Ordnance - can it move? @ 2013/07/25 17:51:54


Post by: Dracos


So then my marines still get their 3+ armour save against AP2?

Codex says they do, rulebook says they don't.

This is the key that you are missing.


Riptide Firing Ordnance - can it move? @ 2013/07/25 17:53:27


Post by: Col. Dracus


*I will not respond to any other comments made as I can tell this is a heated discussion, I just wanting to give my POV.*

I am on the Ordnance + 1 side.

The way I see it the Ordnance rule is a general rule for that weapon type and does reduce the number of shots down to just the Ordnance weapon. The MT is more specific as it is from the Tau book and clearly states that you may fire one additional weapon.

So we go from BRB saying 1, to the Codex saying +1 (with no exceptions given).

If the MT was not meant to work with an Ordnance weapon it would need to say "except when firing ordnance" and not have the blanket statement of shooting one additional weapon without any restrictions given.



Riptide Firing Ordnance - can it move? @ 2013/07/25 17:53:51


Post by: jeffersonian000


Actually, if the multi-tracker rule contained verbiage stating the additional weapon ignored the ordnance restriction, there would be no conflict due to specific rules overriding general rules. The conflict in this case is that more specific verbiage is missing, not that more specific verbiage should be included.

Personally, I believe the side that says Ordnance takes precedence over multi-tracker is correct, however, the other side has a legitimate rules based argument.

SJ


Riptide Firing Ordnance - can it move? @ 2013/07/25 17:55:45


Post by: Steel-W0LF


 Dracos wrote:
So then my marines still get their 3+ armour save against AP2?

Codex says they do, rulebook says they don't.

This is the key that you are missing.


I've already demonstrated why the two are not even comparable, and why they are not valid comparisons.

The RPJ example is the only one that compares the same rules wise, even if it paints an absurdity



Riptide Firing Ordnance - can it move? @ 2013/07/25 17:58:16


Post by: rigeld2


 Steel-W0LF wrote:
You know the rest, you got nothing to fall back on.

How about the actual rules? How about you quote the rule on page 7 and for once in this thread cite the conflict.


Riptide Firing Ordnance - can it move? @ 2013/07/25 17:58:32


Post by: Steel-W0LF


 jeffersonian000 wrote:
Actually, if the multi-tracker rule contained verbiage stating the additional weapon ignored the ordnance restriction, there would be no conflict due to specific rules overriding general rules. The conflict in this case is that more specific verbiage is missing, not that more specific verbiage should be included.

Personally, I believe the side that says Ordnance takes precedence over multi-tracker is correct, however, the other side has a legitimate rules based argument.

SJ


Rules as intended I could honestly see it going either way. As written I think its the +1.

Either way its not likely to be a groundbreaking difference...


Automatically Appended Next Post:
rigeld2 wrote:
 Steel-W0LF wrote:
You know the rest, you got nothing to fall back on.

How about the actual rules? How about you quote the rule on page 7 and for once in this thread cite the conflict.


/ignored


Riptide Firing Ordnance - can it move? @ 2013/07/25 18:00:40


Post by: Dracos


In what way is it different? You have made no such demonstration.

How about this, change the AP to AP3 - AP3 stil allows some armour saves thus fulfilling your "it must be sometimes still permitted".

AP3 does still allow armour saves to be taken, with the exclusion of some armour saves. My marines say they get armour saves in the codex, which contradicts the AP3 saying you don't get an armour save if it is 3+.

This is analogous as far as the application of codex > rulebook goes.


Riptide Firing Ordnance - can it move? @ 2013/07/25 18:09:34


Post by: Steel-W0LF


 Dracos wrote:
In what way is it different? You have made no such demonstration.

How about this, change the AP to AP3 - AP3 stil allows some armour saves thus fulfilling your "it must be sometimes still permitted".

AP3 does still allow armour saves to be taken, with the exclusion of some armour saves. My marines say they get armour saves in the codex, which contradicts the AP3 saying you don't get an armour save if it is 3+.

This is analogous as far as the application of codex > rulebook goes.


Follow the permissive ruleset you guys keep saying I dont get.

In your example:
-You get hit by an AP 2 or 3 weapon... Sure
-You have a 3+ save... why not?
-Do you have permission to make a 3+ save against AP2 or 3? no..... not at all.

In the Ordinance example:

You are wanting to fire ordnance... sure
Do you have permission to fire ordinance? yes (assuming you didnt do something that denies shooting....like running in previous examples.)
Do you have permission to fire any additional?
No.. per the ordinance rule. p51?
Yes per the Tau rule p.69 (Unless the debate is going to move back to the argument "may fire one additional" is not in actuality a permission)

Per p7 of the BRB, in the situation where the codex and BRB conflict. You go with the codex.


Riptide Firing Ordnance - can it move? @ 2013/07/25 19:03:30


Post by: rigeld2


 Steel-W0LF wrote:
-Do you have permission to make a 3+ save against AP2 or 3? no..... not at all.

Really? My codex says I have a 3+ save. That's a conflict I guess - according to you.


Riptide Firing Ordnance - can it move? @ 2013/07/25 19:18:37


Post by: easysauce


another example of this absurd theory that the tau get to ignore ordinance rules is nemisis force weapons,

my codex says I must simply make a psychic test, it does not tell me to expend a warp charge.

even though the BRB says I do expend a charge, my codex does not, it just tells me to test and activate if passed.

ergo my GK's get to activate nemisis' without expending a charge according to your interpretation of codex vs BRB


Riptide Firing Ordnance - can it move? @ 2013/07/25 19:51:41


Post by: Steel-W0LF


 easysauce wrote:
another example of this absurd theory that the tau get to ignore ordinance rules is nemisis force weapons,

my codex says I must simply make a psychic test, it does not tell me to expend a warp charge.

even though the BRB says I do expend a charge, my codex does not, it just tells me to test and activate if passed.

ergo my GK's get to activate nemisis' without expending a charge according to your interpretation of codex vs BRB


Your codex is not telling you not to expend a warp charge..

no conflict to resolve. failed example.


Riptide Firing Ordnance - can it move? @ 2013/07/25 19:57:15


Post by: Dracos


And the Tau codex does not tell you do ignore the Ordinance restriction. No conflict to resolve.


Riptide Firing Ordnance - can it move? @ 2013/07/25 20:02:06


Post by: Jackal


Reading through that gave me a headache.
Was like deja vu with every page.


People seem hung up because it has the multi-tracker, so assume it is there to do something.
Its not a direct upgrade to the riptide, its a piece of kit that ALL battlesuits have per P.70.

Also, for those who still seem pissed about it, read P.100.
Stealth suits only have a burst cannon, thus no ability to fire a second weapon via the tracker due to not having one.
Oh look, that bit of kit again has no use.

Forget that argument.
Just because something has a special rule or piece of kit does not mean it has any use.



A MC can fire 2 weapons.
The tracker (which is of no use here) boosts this to 3.
Ordnance rules then push this down to just the cannon.

Ordnance rulings are quite clear when they state you cannot fire any other weapons.
There is no mod. in shots there, its a straight up end of shooting once its fired.

Seems pretty clear cut to me.
Multi-tracker is a general rule that allows an extra shot (useful to crisis and broadsides)

Ordnance is a special rule on weapons that allows no other weapons to be fired if it is used that turn.


Riptide Firing Ordnance - can it move? @ 2013/07/25 20:04:22


Post by: Steel-W0LF


 Dracos wrote:
And the Tau codex does not tell you do ignore the Ordinance restriction. No conflict to resolve.


It doesn't need to.

The wording of the rule over rides it.

Unless you can site a page number stating that codex rules need to specifically mention every BRB rules they ever rule. Red Paint Job does not SPECIFICALLY state that it over rules the restriction on disembarking (i dont own orks) yet it does over rule it.


I mean there is p.7....... but we all know how that looks for your argument.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
 Jackal wrote:
Reading through that gave me a headache.
Was like deja vu with every page.


People seem hung up because it has the multi-tracker, so assume it is there to do something.
Its not a direct upgrade to the riptide, its a piece of kit that ALL battlesuits have per P.70.

Also, for those who still seem pissed about it, read P.100.
Stealth suits only have a burst cannon, thus no ability to fire a second weapon via the tracker due to not having one.
Oh look, that bit of kit again has no use.

Forget that argument.
Just because something has a special rule or piece of kit does not mean it has any use.



A MC can fire 2 weapons.
The tracker (which is of no use here) boosts this to 3.
Ordnance rules then push this down to just the cannon.

Ordnance rulings are quite clear when they state you cannot fire any other weapons.
There is no mod. in shots there, its a straight up end of shooting once its fired.

Seems pretty clear cut to me.
Multi-tracker is a general rule that allows an extra shot (useful to crisis and broadsides)

Ordnance is a special rule on weapons that allows no other weapons to be fired if it is used that turn.


Site a page number defining the terms in red.


Riptide Firing Ordnance - can it move? @ 2013/07/25 20:13:33


Post by: Dracos


I think at this point the conversation has circled the drain a few times, lets let it go down.

You are entitled to play any way you want, but I think most posters can see why the rule you are quoting (codex > rulebook) can't be applied in the way you want.

Happy gaming everyone.


Riptide Firing Ordnance - can it move? @ 2013/07/25 20:15:03


Post by: Steel-W0LF


 Dracos wrote:
I think at this point the conversation has circled the drain a few times, lets let it go down.

You are entitled to play any way you want, but I think most posters can see why the rule you are quoting (codex > rulebook) can't be applied in the way you want.

Happy gaming everyone.


And the ones claiming what you claim cant site ANY rule....at all.

Happy Gaming.


Riptide Firing Ordnance - can it move? @ 2013/07/25 20:15:44


Post by: JinxDragon


Okay then, explain this one:
Smash on the Black Mace.

Smash is a basic rule that adjusts the armour penetration of a weapon as it's primary function. It isn't the only function, of course, but the multi-tracker in the battlesuit ruleset isn't the only function of that rule either. Without going into very detail description on what a rule dues, lets just say that smash is designed to allow all models to ignore armour saves during close combat, granted they have this rule of course.

The Black mace states it uses a set armour piercing, like all other weapon profiles.

By the logic that codex trumps Base Rule book in any conflict, the black mace can never benefit from Smash. We have two different advanced rules, one that governs weapon profiles and one that governs smash. Both rules are giving us different numbers to use, and therefore they would be 'in conflict' any such situation leads to conflict. A codex is telling you to use a set armour piercing while the rulebook is telling you to use another, therefore the codex wins.

Then take this to the logical extension:
Does smash do anything at all?

Nothing in the base rule book informs us what to do when there is a conflict between two advanced rules in the same codex or within the base rule book. All weapon profiles provide an armour piercing value to use, therefore all weapon profiles are in conflict with Smash by Steel-Wolf's logic. With no rule telling us we have permission to resolve the conflict one way or another, we are left with no guidance on how to proceed in these situations. Therefore Smash can never change an armour piercing value, even though it is very clear the intent is to allow smash models to ignore armour within close combat, because permission hasn't been granted for Smash advanced rule to overcome the weapon advanced rules!


Riptide Firing Ordnance - can it move? @ 2013/07/25 20:20:27


Post by: Quark


You have 85 posts on Dakka, and over 50 of them are in this thread alone. Perhaps it's time to take a step back and listen to others, instead of only talking.


Riptide Firing Ordnance - can it move? @ 2013/07/25 20:30:52


Post by: Jackal


Site a page number defining the terms in red.



I dont need to quote anything.
What i said was simply common sense.

Multi-tracker allows you to fire an extra weapon.
That is a broad statement, making it general rather than specific as it does not go into any detail as to how it works with specific rules.

The Ordnace rule in this case is far more specific as it tells us how it works alongside a MC (the riptide in this case)


General - Widespread, rather vague ruling.
Specific - Tells us how it functions with things (units/weapons etc) and goes into detail about this.


If your entire argument is going to be "It does not say i cant do it" then people can turn that round as a basic counter-argument, but it wont go anywhere except round in circles.


Riptide Firing Ordnance - can it move? @ 2013/07/25 20:34:00


Post by: Steel-W0LF


JinxDragon wrote:
Okay then, explain this one:
Smash on the Black Mace.

Smash is a basic rule that adjusts the armour penetration of a weapon as it's primary function. It isn't the only function, of course, but the multi-tracker in the battlesuit ruleset isn't the only function of that rule either. Without going into very detail description on what a rule dues, lets just say that smash is designed to allow all models to ignore armour saves during close combat, granted they have this rule of course.

The Black mace states it uses a set armour piercing, like all other weapon profiles.

By the logic that codex trumps Base Rule book in any conflict, the black mace can never benefit from Smash. We have two different advanced rules, one that governs weapon profiles and one that governs smash. Both rules are giving us different numbers to use, and therefore they would be 'in conflict' any such situation leads to conflict. A codex is telling you to use a set armour piercing while the rulebook is telling you to use another, therefore the codex wins.

Then take this to the logical extension:
Does smash do anything at all?

Nothing in the base rule book informs us what to do when there is a conflict between two advanced rules in the same codex or within the base rule book. [ All weapon profiles provide an armour piercing value to use, therefore all weapon profiles are in conflict with Smash by Steel-Wolf's logic. With no rule telling us we have permission to resolve the conflict one way or another, we are left with no guidance on how to proceed in these situations. Therefore Smash can never change an armour piercing value, even though it is very clear the intent is to allow smash models to ignore armour within close combat, because permission hasn't been granted for Smash advanced rule to overcome the weapon advanced rules!


To the red: That is a valid argument for a FAQ. RAW would make it ap4? but it does not make sense that it would make ap worse than before... IF I was Chaos, I would play it as ap2 unless someone challenged on it, then I'ld have to go with ap4 .

Blue: And? Has anyone claimed GW has epic no-confusion rule writing skills... Its a great game, but after 6 editions its clear they don't always get things right.




Automatically Appended Next Post:
 Jackal wrote:
Site a page number defining the terms in red.



I dont need to quote anything.
What i said was simply common sense.

Multi-tracker allows you to fire an extra weapon.
That is a broad statement, making it general rather than specific as it does not go into any detail as to how it works with specific rules.

The Ordnace rule in this case is far more specific as it tells us how it works alongside a MC (the riptide in this case)


General - Widespread, rather vague ruling.
Specific - Tells us how it functions with things (units/weapons etc) and goes into detail about this.


If your entire argument is going to be "It does not say i cant do it" then people can turn that round as a basic counter-argument, but it wont go anywhere except round in circles.


So you are faced with page numbers and rules sited, and the counter argument is "I dont need to quote anything...."




Automatically Appended Next Post:
Quark wrote:
You have 85 posts on Dakka, and over 50 of them are in this thread alone. Perhaps it's time to take a step back and listen to others, instead of only talking.


Yes, cause post count is relevant.......... errrrr


Riptide Firing Ordnance - can it move? @ 2013/07/25 20:41:54


Post by: Jackal


So you are faced with page numbers and rules sited, and the counter argument is "I dont need to quote anything...."


Seems more like you dont like to either read something, or admit that something is up with your argument.

In that case, please explain what your ideas of "Specific" and "General" are please.


Riptide Firing Ordnance - can it move? @ 2013/07/25 20:42:09


Post by: Fragile


 Col. Dracus wrote:
*I will not respond to any other comments made as I can tell this is a heated discussion, I just wanting to give my POV.*

I am on the Ordnance + 1 side.

The way I see it the Ordnance rule is a general rule for that weapon type and does reduce the number of shots down to just the Ordnance weapon. The MT is more specific as it is from the Tau book and clearly states that you may fire one additional weapon.

So we go from BRB saying 1, to the Codex saying +1 (with no exceptions given).

If the MT was not meant to work with an Ordnance weapon it would need to say "except when firing ordnance" and not have the blanket statement of shooting one additional weapon without any restrictions given.



So you can run and fire? Or stunned passengers in tranports with MTs can fire ?


Riptide Firing Ordnance - can it move? @ 2013/07/25 20:44:58


Post by: Jackal


So in theory, if a model with a multi-tracker suffers an effect that prohibits it from firing ie: The model is not allowed to fire this turn.

So by your ideas, the tracker would still allow it to fire a weapon.


Riptide Firing Ordnance - can it move? @ 2013/07/25 20:48:13


Post by: easysauce


you are making the same arguement over and over...

BRB says if you run, you can shoot 0 weapons, you seem to get that its 0 not 0+1 for multi tracker, and dont think thats a conflict (which is correct, you cannot run+shoot with multitracker)

BRB says if you fire ordinance, you can shoot 0 other weapons,
yet in this case you say it is a conflict, and its 0+1... even though the + 1 happens BEFORE you choose to shoot ordinance, and even though there is no conflict.


Riptide Firing Ordnance - can it move? @ 2013/07/25 20:48:27


Post by: Steel-W0LF


 Jackal wrote:
So in theory, if a model with a multi-tracker suffers an effect that prohibits it from firing ie: The model is not allowed to fire this turn.

So by your ideas, the tracker would still allow it to fire a weapon.


Not at all.

In order to fire "an additional weapon" you have to have been allowed to fire in the first place... this is 5 pages ago.


Riptide Firing Ordnance - can it move? @ 2013/07/25 20:49:29


Post by: JinxDragon


Then explain to me which situations in which the ordinance restriction can be applied?

The only one from the basic rule book which could be effected by this restriction is the monstrous creature may fire an additional weapon clause, using very similar words to multi-trackers. The only other possible modes effected are vehicles and they have a specific rule telling you how to resolve this 'conflict. Seeing we can't use page 7 to resolve this 'conflict,' the ordinance restrictions have no purpose by your logic. So please, explain to me how this problem can be resolved....


Riptide Firing Ordnance - can it move? @ 2013/07/25 20:50:37


Post by: Fragile


 Steel-W0LF wrote:
 Jackal wrote:
So in theory, if a model with a multi-tracker suffers an effect that prohibits it from firing ie: The model is not allowed to fire this turn.

So by your ideas, the tracker would still allow it to fire a weapon.


Not at all.

In order to fire "an additional weapon" you have to have been allowed to fire in the first place... this is 5 pages ago.


And this argument is a fallacy. It doesnt matter how your not allowed to fire, the MT does not override that restriction.


Riptide Firing Ordnance - can it move? @ 2013/07/25 20:51:48


Post by: Steel-W0LF


Fragile wrote:
 Steel-W0LF wrote:
 Jackal wrote:
So in theory, if a model with a multi-tracker suffers an effect that prohibits it from firing ie: The model is not allowed to fire this turn.

So by your ideas, the tracker would still allow it to fire a weapon.


Not at all.

In order to fire "an additional weapon" you have to have been allowed to fire in the first place... this is 5 pages ago.


And this argument is a fallacy. It doesnt matter how your not allowed to fire, the MT does not override that restriction.


Pg#?

Edit: Also... In this discussion the assumption is that you are being allowed to fire... or else you would not be firing the ordnance in the first place.


Riptide Firing Ordnance - can it move? @ 2013/07/25 20:56:16


Post by: Fragile


Pg# that says you "in order to fire an additional weapon you have to have been allowed to fire in the first place"


Run and shoot, stunned and shoot, ordnance and shoot all have the same restrictions. If you do X then you cannot fire. You want to apply that selectively and not universally, which proves your argument is invalid. The Ork movement with Red Paint Job also proves you are wrong.




Riptide Firing Ordnance - can it move? @ 2013/07/25 20:58:53


Post by: Steel-W0LF


Fragile wrote:
Pg# that says you "in order to fire an additional weapon you have to have been allowed to fire in the first place"


Run and shoot, stunned and shoot, ordnance and shoot all have the same restrictions. If you do X then you cannot fire. You want to apply that selectively and not universally, which proves your argument is invalid. The Ork movement with Red Paint Job also proves you are wrong.




If you can use bonuses in situations you cant use the base ability, them I'm going to start using bonus CC attacks against units I have not charged, and Red Paint lets orks move 1" if immobilized.


Riptide Firing Ordnance - can it move? @ 2013/07/25 21:03:30


Post by: Fragile


 Steel-W0LF wrote:
Fragile wrote:
Pg# that says you "in order to fire an additional weapon you have to have been allowed to fire in the first place"


Run and shoot, stunned and shoot, ordnance and shoot all have the same restrictions. If you do X then you cannot fire. You want to apply that selectively and not universally, which proves your argument is invalid. The Ork movement with Red Paint Job also proves you are wrong.




If you can use bonuses in situations you cant use the base ability, them I'm going to start using bonus CC attacks against units I have not charged, and Red Paint lets orks move 1" if immobilized.


And that statement has nothing to do with the argument.


Riptide Firing Ordnance - can it move? @ 2013/07/25 21:23:56


Post by: Steel-W0LF


Fragile wrote:
 Steel-W0LF wrote:
Fragile wrote:
Pg# that says you "in order to fire an additional weapon you have to have been allowed to fire in the first place"


Run and shoot, stunned and shoot, ordnance and shoot all have the same restrictions. If you do X then you cannot fire. You want to apply that selectively and not universally, which proves your argument is invalid. The Ork movement with Red Paint Job also proves you are wrong.




If you can use bonuses in situations you cant use the base ability, them I'm going to start using bonus CC attacks against units I have not charged, and Red Paint lets orks move 1" if immobilized.


And that statement has nothing to do with the argument.


Sure it does...

If I'm not allowed to shoot at all... I cant get any bonuses to my number of weapons I can shoot.
If I cannot make CC attacks at all, I cant use bonus CC attacks.
If I cannot move at all, I can not move bonus amounts of distance.

In the situation being discussed shooting is obviously allowed, or else you couldn't shoot ordnance. Whats being ignored is that the Riptide CAN shoot, its firing ordnance, what rule trumps the codex that says one additional weapon can be fired? We've had theories, Examples that have been FAQ'd meaning they used to be conflicts, Opinions, and Generalities vs Specifics.......but none can point to an actual rule.


Riptide Firing Ordnance - can it move? @ 2013/07/25 21:28:01


Post by: Fragile


And you have provided no rule that says Multitracker allows you to fire when prohibited by Ordnance. Just a bunch of 0+1 type of formulas. Those same formulas work for all the situations that you now claim dont work. Your not consistent, either a MT can run and shoot, etc... or you cannot fire Ordnance and "+1"


Riptide Firing Ordnance - can it move? @ 2013/07/25 21:29:44


Post by: Steel-W0LF


Fragile wrote:
And you have provided no rule that says Multitracker allows you to fire when prohibited by Ordnance. Just a bunch of 0+1 type of formulas. Those same formulas work for all the situations that you now claim dont work. Your not consistent, either a MT can run and shoot, etc... or you cannot fire Ordnance and "+1"


I have not provided ANY 0+1 formulas, because a rule that states "additional" implies that the first number cannot be 0.


Riptide Firing Ordnance - can it move? @ 2013/07/25 21:34:32


Post by: hyv3mynd


 Steel-W0LF wrote:
Fragile wrote:
 Steel-W0LF wrote:
Fragile wrote:
Pg# that says you "in order to fire an additional weapon you have to have been allowed to fire in the first place"


Run and shoot, stunned and shoot, ordnance and shoot all have the same restrictions. If you do X then you cannot fire. You want to apply that selectively and not universally, which proves your argument is invalid. The Ork movement with Red Paint Job also proves you are wrong.




If you can use bonuses in situations you cant use the base ability, them I'm going to start using bonus CC attacks against units I have not charged, and Red Paint lets orks move 1" if immobilized.


And that statement has nothing to do with the argument.


Sure it does...

If I'm not allowed to shoot at all... I cant get any bonuses to my number of weapons I can shoot.
If I cannot make CC attacks at all, I cant use bonus CC attacks.
If I cannot move at all, I can not move bonus amounts of distance.

In the situation being discussed shooting is obviously allowed, or else you couldn't shoot ordnance. Whats being ignored is that the Riptide CAN shoot, its firing ordnance, what rule trumps the codex that says one additional weapon can be fired? We've had theories, Examples that have been FAQ'd meaning they used to be conflicts, Opinions, and Generalities vs Specifics.......but none can point to an actual rule.


They have, you've just covered your ears and said "LALALALA CODEX > BRB"

Codex only trumps the BRB when there is a conflict in rules. A conflict like where snapshots cannot be modified above bs1, yet the pinpoint rule allows snapshots to be modified. BRB says one thing, codex addresses that one thing and says the opposite.

Multi-tracker does not address ordnance firing, therefore there is no conflict. The conflict you're claiming is made up, not RAW. There is nothing in writing (RAW) that says MT overrides the ordnance ban. Therefore no conflict.


Riptide Firing Ordnance - can it move? @ 2013/07/25 21:37:40


Post by: Elric Greywolf


 easysauce wrote:
if all a model needed to fire ordanace + another weapon was permission to shoot more then one gun at a time,
then EVERY monster and tank can fire ordanance + other weapons, since they have permission to fire more then one weapon.

but we all know this is not the case, as being allowed to shoot 2, 3, 4 or even a million weapons, does not overide that if you shoot ordinance, you dont get to shoot other weapons.

there are specific rules about ordinance (ie heavy vehicles) that get around this, and they make very specific reference to ordinance, which multi tracker does not.

every single vehicle can fire more then one weapon, adding one more allowable weapon to that # does not overide the ordinance rules, otherwise every vehicle can fire ordinance and other weapons, simply because it can fire more then one weapon already.


This, along with RPJ, are the two most convincing arguments I've seen thus far.
Infantry model is allowed to fire a single ranged weapon, or 0-1 weapons (since there is no requirement to fire in the first place). Ordnance, therefore, doesn't really affect Infantry models in this regard, since they can only fire one weapon anyhow.
MCs may fire 0-2 weapons. When using Ordnance, this is restricted to 0-1 weapon. The restriction overrides the permission.
Multitracker lets the MC fire an additional weapon, resulting in 0-3 weapons. Ordnance still has the restriction 0-1 weapons. There's an overlap here, which is 0-1.

"You may fire 0-3 weapons as an MC with Multitracker. When firing Ordnance, you may only fire 1 weapon, the Ordnance." Firing 1 weapon falls into 0-3 weapons, thus fulfilling both rules at the same time.


Riptide Firing Ordnance - can it move? @ 2013/07/25 21:43:47


Post by: Steel-W0LF


 hyv3mynd wrote:
 Steel-W0LF wrote:
Fragile wrote:
 Steel-W0LF wrote:
Fragile wrote:
Pg# that says you "in order to fire an additional weapon you have to have been allowed to fire in the first place"


Run and shoot, stunned and shoot, ordnance and shoot all have the same restrictions. If you do X then you cannot fire. You want to apply that selectively and not universally, which proves your argument is invalid. The Ork movement with Red Paint Job also proves you are wrong.




If you can use bonuses in situations you cant use the base ability, them I'm going to start using bonus CC attacks against units I have not charged, and Red Paint lets orks move 1" if immobilized.


And that statement has nothing to do with the argument.


Sure it does...

If I'm not allowed to shoot at all... I cant get any bonuses to my number of weapons I can shoot.
If I cannot make CC attacks at all, I cant use bonus CC attacks.
If I cannot move at all, I can not move bonus amounts of distance.

In the situation being discussed shooting is obviously allowed, or else you couldn't shoot ordnance. Whats being ignored is that the Riptide CAN shoot, its firing ordnance, what rule trumps the codex that says one additional weapon can be fired? We've had theories, Examples that have been FAQ'd meaning they used to be conflicts, Opinions, and Generalities vs Specifics.......but none can point to an actual rule.


They have, you've just covered your ears and said "LALALALA CODEX > BRB"

Codex only trumps the BRB when there is a conflict in rules. A conflict like where snapshots cannot be modified above bs1, yet the pinpoint rule allows snapshots to be modified. BRB says one thing, codex addresses that one thing and says the opposite.

Multi-tracker does not address ordnance firing, therefore there is no conflict. The conflict you're claiming is made up, not RAW. There is nothing in writing (RAW) that says MT overrides the ordnance ban. Therefore no conflict.


Red: except page 7.... see below.

Blue: That is no where in type....



Riptide Firing Ordnance - can it move? @ 2013/07/25 21:45:00


Post by: rigeld2


 Steel-W0LF wrote:
And the ones claiming what you claim cant site ANY rule....at all.

Happy Gaming.

That's a lie.


Riptide Firing Ordnance - can it move? @ 2013/07/25 21:46:38


Post by: Steel-W0LF


 Elric Greywolf wrote:
 easysauce wrote:
if all a model needed to fire ordanace + another weapon was permission to shoot more then one gun at a time,
then EVERY monster and tank can fire ordanance + other weapons, since they have permission to fire more then one weapon.

but we all know this is not the case, as being allowed to shoot 2, 3, 4 or even a million weapons, does not overide that if you shoot ordinance, you dont get to shoot other weapons.

there are specific rules about ordinance (ie heavy vehicles) that get around this, and they make very specific reference to ordinance, which multi tracker does not.

every single vehicle can fire more then one weapon, adding one more allowable weapon to that # does not overide the ordinance rules, otherwise every vehicle can fire ordinance and other weapons, simply because it can fire more then one weapon already.


This, along with RPJ, are the two most convincing arguments I've seen thus far.
Infantry model is allowed to fire a single ranged weapon, or 0-1 weapons (since there is no requirement to fire in the first place). Ordnance, therefore, doesn't really affect Infantry models in this regard, since they can only fire one weapon anyhow.
MCs may fire 0-2 weapons. When using Ordnance, this is restricted to 0-1 weapon. The restriction overrides the permission.
Multitracker lets the MC fire an additional weapon, resulting in 0-3 weapons. Ordnance still has the restriction 0-1 weapons. There's an overlap here, which is 0-1.

"You may fire 0-3 weapons as an MC with Multitracker. When firing Ordnance, you may only fire 1 weapon, the Ordnance." Firing 1 weapon falls into 0-3 weapons, thus fulfilling both rules at the same time.


I agree thats close... which is why its key to use "additional" in its proper usage.


Riptide Firing Ordnance - can it move? @ 2013/07/25 21:47:13


Post by: Fragile


There is nothing on pg 7 about Ordnance weapons.


Riptide Firing Ordnance - can it move? @ 2013/07/25 21:51:32


Post by: Steel-W0LF


Fragile wrote:
There is nothing on pg 7 about Ordnance weapons.


It tells you which rules take priority.

Codex.


Riptide Firing Ordnance - can it move? @ 2013/07/25 21:52:25


Post by: rigeld2


 Steel-W0LF wrote:
Fragile wrote:
There is nothing on pg 7 about Ordnance weapons.


It tells you which rules take priority.

Codex.

In the case of a conflict - which you keep ignoring and literally refusing to cite evidence of.
I'm going to go ahead and get a mod to lock the thread - I'm tired of being trolled.


Riptide Firing Ordnance - can it move? @ 2013/07/25 21:57:11


Post by: Fragile


You have yet to cite a conflict, hence you have no rules basis.


Riptide Firing Ordnance - can it move? @ 2013/07/25 21:59:58


Post by: hyv3mynd


 Steel-W0LF wrote:
 hyv3mynd wrote:
 Steel-W0LF wrote:
Fragile wrote:
 Steel-W0LF wrote:
Fragile wrote:
Pg# that says you "in order to fire an additional weapon you have to have been allowed to fire in the first place"


Run and shoot, stunned and shoot, ordnance and shoot all have the same restrictions. If you do X then you cannot fire. You want to apply that selectively and not universally, which proves your argument is invalid. The Ork movement with Red Paint Job also proves you are wrong.




If you can use bonuses in situations you cant use the base ability, them I'm going to start using bonus CC attacks against units I have not charged, and Red Paint lets orks move 1" if immobilized.


And that statement has nothing to do with the argument.


Sure it does...

If I'm not allowed to shoot at all... I cant get any bonuses to my number of weapons I can shoot.
If I cannot make CC attacks at all, I cant use bonus CC attacks.
If I cannot move at all, I can not move bonus amounts of distance.

In the situation being discussed shooting is obviously allowed, or else you couldn't shoot ordnance. Whats being ignored is that the Riptide CAN shoot, its firing ordnance, what rule trumps the codex that says one additional weapon can be fired? We've had theories, Examples that have been FAQ'd meaning they used to be conflicts, Opinions, and Generalities vs Specifics.......but none can point to an actual rule.


They have, you've just covered your ears and said "LALALALA CODEX > BRB"

Codex only trumps the BRB when there is a conflict in rules. A conflict like where snapshots cannot be modified above bs1, yet the pinpoint rule allows snapshots to be modified. BRB says one thing, codex addresses that one thing and says the opposite.

Multi-tracker does not address ordnance firing, therefore there is no conflict. The conflict you're claiming is made up, not RAW. There is nothing in writing (RAW) that says MT overrides the ordnance ban. Therefore no conflict.


Red: except page 7.... see below.

Blue: That is no where in type....



Still no conflict because you aren't told there is. Because you aren't told there is a conflict, you cannot reference pg7.

MT is wargear that is always active. Turn 1- turn 7. Firing ordnance is a choice that may or may not happen turns 1-7.

MT allows a MC to fire up to 3 weapons normally. Choosing to fire ordnance reduces this to one. During your shooting phase, you can fire up to 3 normally or 1 ordnance. No rules have been broken as there is no conflict. Since they are not multiple modifiers or set modifiers, you cannot choose to apply them in different orders to achieve different results to your advantage.

If you want a conflict which favors the codex, you would need the rules to say:
"When firing ordnance, the model cannot fire any additional weapons"
"Models with multi-trackers may fire one additional weapon, even when firing ordnance"

THAT is a conflict in rules where the BRB says one thing and the codex DIRECTLY contradicts it. Your argument stands on a premise that doesn't exist.


Riptide Firing Ordnance - can it move? @ 2013/07/25 22:02:43


Post by: Elric Greywolf


 Steel-W0LF wrote:
 Elric Greywolf wrote:
 easysauce wrote:
if all a model needed to fire ordanace + another weapon was permission to shoot more then one gun at a time,
then EVERY monster and tank can fire ordanance + other weapons, since they have permission to fire more then one weapon.

but we all know this is not the case, as being allowed to shoot 2, 3, 4 or even a million weapons, does not overide that if you shoot ordinance, you dont get to shoot other weapons.

there are specific rules about ordinance (ie heavy vehicles) that get around this, and they make very specific reference to ordinance, which multi tracker does not.

every single vehicle can fire more then one weapon, adding one more allowable weapon to that # does not overide the ordinance rules, otherwise every vehicle can fire ordinance and other weapons, simply because it can fire more then one weapon already.


This, along with RPJ, are the two most convincing arguments I've seen thus far.
Infantry model is allowed to fire a single ranged weapon, or 0-1 weapons (since there is no requirement to fire in the first place). Ordnance, therefore, doesn't really affect Infantry models in this regard, since they can only fire one weapon anyhow.
MCs may fire 0-2 weapons. When using Ordnance, this is restricted to 0-1 weapon. The restriction overrides the permission.
Multitracker lets the MC fire an additional weapon, resulting in 0-3 weapons. Ordnance still has the restriction 0-1 weapons. There's an overlap here, which is 0-1.

"You may fire 0-3 weapons as an MC with Multitracker. When firing Ordnance, you may only fire 1 weapon, the Ordnance." Firing 1 weapon falls into 0-3 weapons, thus fulfilling both rules at the same time.


I agree thats close... which is why its key to use "additional" in its proper usage.


I would, first off, repeat the advice that someone on here gave to you earlier: as a noob on this site, have some respect for your elders. It's not personal, it's simply a matter of respect. If someone is more experienced than you, you should value that experience and take advantage of it, not fight it every step of the way. The elders can be crotchety and rude sometimes...but it's up to us young'uns to deal with their crankiness, ignore their rude and terse posts, and instead soak up the wisdom contained in their gravelly words. We're young, we can handle it!

Secondly, your response to my post was quite unhelpful. It did not, in any manner that I can comprehend, successfully address my point. To use your own words, "Try again."


Edit: Finally, a discussion about rules is nothing to get upset about. There's nothing personal going on here. Who cares if you're right or wrong? The point is to find the truth in the situation, not to compare the lengths of our respective lower horns. If you're wrong, so what? If you're right...again, so what? You don't personally know any of these people; you literally CANNOT lose face online, since there's no face to look at! If you feel like someone is making ad homenim attacks, report the post to a Mod (with the Yellow Triangle in the upper right of the post). And then, if the Mod doesn't do anything about it because it wasn't inflammatory, TRUST the Mod.


Riptide Firing Ordnance - can it move? @ 2013/07/25 22:07:26


Post by: Mr. Shine


 Ghaz wrote:
Mr. Shine has the same problem with his argument against the multi-tracker and running. The rules for the multi-tracker do not say that you can only fire an additional weapon if you can fire a weapon in the first place, so why the restriction that does not exist? 0+1=1.


 Ghaz wrote:
And I'm showing you why your specific argument that you presented there falls apart, just as Mr. Shines argument falls apart. If you allow the additional weapon to be fired with ordnance then you have to allow it to be fired while running because there's nothing saying that you can only fire the additional weapon if you could fire in the first place. It's a restriction which doesn't exist and thus invalidates their entire position.


No, you're still completely missing the point. You don't understand the definition of "additional". Your examples do not relate at all because they are trying to compare "0+1=1" to "(1+0)+1=2".

Running disallows you from making any shooting attacks at all, and you cannot make something in addition to nothing.

Your examples are not structurally the same as what we are discussing and are irrelevant.


I think it's clear that we've all reached an impasse here. One side is arguing what the rules say and the other side is arguing their (compelling and agreeable in practice) extension of how the rules should be interpreted.

For myself I see a rules forum as a place to discuss what the rules say and, having reached an obvious point of arguing something on different terms, I don't think either side can effectively contribute to discussion. We can all say "but that's what the rules say" and "but this is how that should be interpreted" but we're not going to reach an agreement.


Riptide Firing Ordnance - can it move? @ 2013/07/25 22:08:51


Post by: Rorschach9


 Elric Greywolf wrote:
 easysauce wrote:
if all a model needed to fire ordanace + another weapon was permission to shoot more then one gun at a time,
then EVERY monster and tank can fire ordanance + other weapons, since they have permission to fire more then one weapon.

but we all know this is not the case, as being allowed to shoot 2, 3, 4 or even a million weapons, does not overide that if you shoot ordinance, you dont get to shoot other weapons.

there are specific rules about ordinance (ie heavy vehicles) that get around this, and they make very specific reference to ordinance, which multi tracker does not.

every single vehicle can fire more then one weapon, adding one more allowable weapon to that # does not overide the ordinance rules, otherwise every vehicle can fire ordinance and other weapons, simply because it can fire more then one weapon already.


This, along with RPJ, are the two most convincing arguments I've seen thus far.
Infantry model is allowed to fire a single ranged weapon, or 0-1 weapons (since there is no requirement to fire in the first place). Ordnance, therefore, doesn't really affect Infantry models in this regard, since they can only fire one weapon anyhow.
MCs may fire 0-2 weapons. When using Ordnance, this is restricted to 0-1 weapon. The restriction overrides the permission.
Multitracker lets the MC fire an additional weapon, resulting in 0-3 weapons. Ordnance still has the restriction 0-1 weapons. There's an overlap here, which is 0-1.

"You may fire 0-3 weapons as an MC with Multitracker. When firing Ordnance, you may only fire 1 weapon, the Ordnance." Firing 1 weapon falls into 0-3 weapons, thus fulfilling both rules at the same time.


This, along with what Hyv3mynd said just after is exactly what I said 2 (?) pages ago.

Clearly there is no changing Steel-WOLF's mind about the lack of conflict in the rulings.

Your Riptide model comes equipped with MultiTracker. Ergo, your Riptide is given permission (from the moment you created your army list and fielded that army) to fire 3 weapons (even if you do not have 3 weapons to shoot with) in each of its shooting phases. In one of those shooting phases you opt to fire Ordnance. At this point, the Ordnance restriction takes effect, reducing your permission to shoot from 3 weapons (even if you cannot because you don't have 3 weapons) to "no other weapons".

Ordnance removes your modifier/permission granted by the wargear, not the other way around.


Riptide Firing Ordnance - can it move? @ 2013/07/25 22:14:39


Post by: acekevin8412


I've been catching up with the 8 pages of this thread and I thought I'd throw in my 2cents.

First of all, in general I agree with the argument that you can't fire additional weapons because of the ordnance restriction.

However, I have one question. Since you can't add one to 0 as in the case of RPJ, does the ordnance weapon itself count as a weapon for the purposes of firing? If it does the you were allowed to fire a weapon and as a result, you can fire one more by virtue of the Multi-tracker. I'm not sure if someone has asked this already and 8 pages is a bit to skim through. I think it comes down to if there is a difference between the MC's set, "able to fire up to 2 weapons" and MT's "fire an additional weapon."


Riptide Firing Ordnance - can it move? @ 2013/07/25 22:15:50


Post by: Elric Greywolf


 Mr. Shine wrote:

No, you're still completely missing the point. You don't understand the definition of "additional". Your examples do not relate at all because they are trying to compare "0+1=1" to "(1+0)+1=2".

Running disallows you from making any shooting attacks at all, and you cannot make something in addition to nothing.

Your examples are not structurally the same as what we are discussing and are irrelevant.


So I suppose the next question is, are you disagreeing with that master of English, Charles Dodgson (aka Lewis Carroll)?
Trasvi wrote:

See Lewis Caroll's take on this:
`Take some more tea,' the March Hare said to Alice, very earnestly.
`I've had nothing yet,' Alice replied in an offended tone, `so I can't take more.'
`You mean you can't take less,' said the Hatter: `it's very easy to take more than nothing.'

Its a funny thing, when the 'strict wording' can sometimes mean something different to the 'common use'. But only one actually makes sense as an extensible rules interpretation.


Because he's a published author...and you, AFAIK, are not. His works, therefore, have gone through an editor, and this makes sense linguistically. You CAN, in fact, have an additional thing where there are zero things to start with. Alice had no tea (0). The Hatter gave her tea (1). She now has more tea than none (0+1).
You may fire no more weapons (0) while firing Ordnance. If you claim that Multitracker lets you fire one more weapon while firing Ordnance (0+1), then it must also let you fire one more weapon after running (0+1).


Riptide Firing Ordnance - can it move? @ 2013/07/25 22:28:16


Post by: Mr. Shine


 acekevin8412 wrote:
However, I have one question. Since you can't add one to 0 as in the case of RPJ, does the ordnance weapon itself count as a weapon for the purposes of firing? If it does the you were allowed to fire a weapon and as a result, you can fire one more by virtue of the Multi-tracker. I'm not sure if someone has asked this already and 8 pages is a bit to skim through. I think it comes down to if there is a difference between the MC's set, "able to fire up to 2 weapons" and MT's "fire an additional weapon."


That's basically the point I was making while others seemed to be jumping on a bandwagon of misrepresented comparisons. A situation where you're tryign to add an additional shot onto no shots allowed is different to adding an additional shot onto one ordnance shot with ordinarily no others allowed.

Additionally this example invokes the Codex > BRB in conflict rule, whereas Monstrous Creatures' two weapons reduced to only ordnance is a purely BRB conflict.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
 Elric Greywolf wrote:
Because he's a published author...and you, AFAIK, are not. His works, therefore, have gone through an editor, and this makes sense linguistically. You CAN, in fact, have an additional thing where there are zero things to start with. Alice had no tea (0). The Hatter gave her tea (1). She now has more tea than none (0+1).
You may fire no more weapons (0) while firing Ordnance. If you claim that Multitracker lets you fire one more weapon while firing Ordnance (0+1), then it must also let you fire one more weapon after running (0+1).


It's a clever ploy, but it's still a strawman. For starter the language is not the same and is not used in the same setting. Punnery and word play for entertainment are not the same as what we are discussing. Note that the rules do not say "one more weapon". Although this can mean the same there is a nuanced difference in meaning. You can have more than zero, but you cannot have one (or more) in addition to nothing. "An additional weapon" does not make sense if you have no weapons to begin with.

Note also that firing ordnance is (1+0)+1=2 as ordnance is a weapon. You are neglecting the "no more" part of the ordnance rules and equating it with simply "no" weapons as in situations such as running.

As for my qualification, I'm a former international teacher of English as a second langauge and currently work in the legal profession, but I'm not going to try and use that as some argument of authority, merely as an aside.


Riptide Firing Ordnance - can it move? @ 2013/07/25 22:48:25


Post by: DeathReaper


 Mr. Shine wrote:
 acekevin8412 wrote:
However, I have one question. Since you can't add one to 0 as in the case of RPJ, does the ordnance weapon itself count as a weapon for the purposes of firing? If it does the you were allowed to fire a weapon and as a result, you can fire one more by virtue of the Multi-tracker. I'm not sure if someone has asked this already and 8 pages is a bit to skim through. I think it comes down to if there is a difference between the MC's set, "able to fire up to 2 weapons" and MT's "fire an additional weapon."


That's basically the point I was making while others seemed to be jumping on a bandwagon of misrepresented comparisons. A situation where you're tryign to add an additional shot onto no shots allowed is different to adding an additional shot onto one ordnance shot with ordinarily no others allowed.

Additionally this example invokes the Codex > BRB in conflict rule, whereas Monstrous Creatures' two weapons reduced to only ordnance is a purely BRB conflict.an aside.

If you run you get no shots allowed. If you fire Ordnance you get no shots allowed.

How it that different exactly?

Plus the Codex only trumps the BRB when there is a conflict.

There is no conflict here. Pinpoint is in conflict with Snap Shots and Pinpoint specifically says it can override the snap shot restriction.

Multi-tracker does not specifically override the Ordnance restriction, therefore it can not override the Ordnance restriction.


Riptide Firing Ordnance - can it move? @ 2013/07/25 22:50:43


Post by: Mr. Shine


 DeathReaper wrote:
If you run you get no shots allowed. If you fire Ordnance you get no shots allowed.

How it that different exactly?


Correction; if you run you get no shots allowed. If you fire ordnance you get the ordnance shot allowed.

You are using an additional interpretation of how the rules should be played to argue against my point of what the rules say. I do not disagree that it is probably how the rules should be played, but I see a rules discussion forum as a place to discuss the rules as they are, and Games Workshop have actually given us only a limited portion of your interpretation.


Riptide Firing Ordnance - can it move? @ 2013/07/25 23:20:10


Post by: Fragile


 Mr. Shine wrote:
 DeathReaper wrote:
If you run you get no shots allowed. If you fire Ordnance you get no shots allowed.

How it that different exactly?


Correction; if you run you get no shots allowed. If you fire ordnance you get the ordnance shot allowed.

You are using an additional interpretation of how the rules should be played to argue against my point of what the rules say. I do not disagree that it is probably how the rules should be played, but I see a rules discussion forum as a place to discuss the rules as they are, and Games Workshop have actually given us only a limited portion of your interpretation.


There is no difference. Each one of those creates a restriction. It does not matter how the restriction was created. Running= 0 shots allowed. Firing an ordnance weapon= 0 shots allowed. If the MT allows one, it must allow both.



Riptide Firing Ordnance - can it move? @ 2013/07/25 23:27:35


Post by: Mr. Shine


Fragile wrote:
There is no difference. Each one of those creates a restriction. It does not matter how the restriction was created. Running= 0 shots allowed. Firing an ordnance weapon= 0 shots allowed. If the MT allows one, it must allow both.


Unless you factor in the meaning of "an additional" in which case you require at least one weapon being fired. This is not present with running, but with an ordnance weapon it is.

It is simple English that you do not do something in addition to nothing.


Riptide Firing Ordnance - can it move? @ 2013/07/25 23:30:17


Post by: Steel-W0LF


Fragile wrote:
 Mr. Shine wrote:
 DeathReaper wrote:
If you run you get no shots allowed. If you fire Ordnance you get no shots allowed.

How it that different exactly?


Correction; if you run you get no shots allowed. If you fire ordnance you get the ordnance shot allowed.

You are using an additional interpretation of how the rules should be played to argue against my point of what the rules say. I do not disagree that it is probably how the rules should be played, but I see a rules discussion forum as a place to discuss the rules as they are, and Games Workshop have actually given us only a limited portion of your interpretation.


There is no difference. Each one of those creates a restriction. It does not matter how the restriction was created. Running= 0 shots allowed. Firing an ordnance weapon= 0 shots allowed. If the MT allows one, it must allow both.



Then a red paint job allows vehicles to move after imobilized.

Firing ordinance is not firing 0 weapons. It's firing 1.


Riptide Firing Ordnance - can it move? @ 2013/07/25 23:30:37


Post by: Fragile


 Mr. Shine wrote:
Fragile wrote:
There is no difference. Each one of those creates a restriction. It does not matter how the restriction was created. Running= 0 shots allowed. Firing an ordnance weapon= 0 shots allowed. If the MT allows one, it must allow both.


Unless you factor in the meaning of "an additional" in which case you require at least one weapon being fired. This is not present with running, but with an ordnance weapon it is.

It is simple English that you do not do something in addition to nothing.


Simple English would show there is no conflict in the rules, but here we are arguing strict RAW. You cannot have it one way for your rule, and not apply it everywhere else it would apply.


Riptide Firing Ordnance - can it move? @ 2013/07/26 00:03:56


Post by: Mr. Shine


Fragile wrote:
Simple English would show there is no conflict in the rules, but here we are arguing strict RAW. You cannot have it one way for your rule, and not apply it everywhere else it would apply.


But that's not the case. I've not been provided with a comparable example of where it could apply elsewhere, and have explained why the examples I've been shown are not the same. In the case of running there is no weapon being fired for the Multi-tracker to allow an additional weapon being fired, whereas with an ordnance weapon the ordnance weapon fulfills the requirement for a weapon being fired to engage the Multi-tracker's "may fire an additional weapon."

The conflict arises when ordnance states no other weapons may be fired while the Multi-tracker allows for an additional weapon to be fired. I'm unsure how that's not a conflict in simple English, assuming we exclude the expanded interpretation of explicit permission > restrictions > permission.


Riptide Firing Ordnance - can it move? @ 2013/07/26 00:08:22


Post by: Fragile


How many weapons can a typical suit fire?


Riptide Firing Ordnance - can it move? @ 2013/07/26 00:09:14


Post by: DeathReaper


Look at Pinpoint Vs. Snap shots for an example of a Codex Conflict with the BRB.

Pinpoint has specific permission, MT does not.


Riptide Firing Ordnance - can it move? @ 2013/07/26 00:15:36


Post by: Steel-W0LF


 DeathReaper wrote:
Look at Pinpoint Vs. Snap shots for an example of a Codex Conflict with the BRB.

Pinpoint has specific permission, MT does not.


And it's not a written requirement anywhere that they do list it.


Riptide Firing Ordnance - can it move? @ 2013/07/26 00:16:43


Post by: Mr. Shine


Fragile wrote:
How many weapons can a typical suit fire?


Two; typically Tau Battlesuits have Multi-trackers.

 DeathReaper wrote:
Look at Pinpoint Vs. Snap shots for an example of a Codex Conflict with the BRB.

Pinpoint has specific permission, MT does not.


I don't have my Codex handy, but if Pinpoint has specific permission then I'm unsure how there can be conflict due to it being explicitly worded to avoid such.


Riptide Firing Ordnance - can it move? @ 2013/07/26 00:18:57


Post by: DeathReaper


 Steel-W0LF wrote:
 DeathReaper wrote:
Look at Pinpoint Vs. Snap shots for an example of a Codex Conflict with the BRB.

Pinpoint has specific permission, MT does not.


And it's not a written requirement anywhere that they do list it.

Codex only wins if there is a conflict.

There is no conflict.

The Multi-tracker would need to say: Even when firing ordnance, for there to be a conflict.
 Mr. Shine wrote:
I don't have my Codex handy, but if Pinpoint has specific permission then I'm unsure how there can be conflict due to it being explicitly worded to avoid such.

Because Snapshot says the BS can not be modified. Pinpoint says that you can modify the BS of a snapshot.

There is a conflict as one says cant and one says can. Usually Can't Trumps Must (Or may), but since the codex > than BRB, and with pinpoint there is a conflict, then Pinpoint (May) trumps Snapshot (Can't) because there is a conflict.


Riptide Firing Ordnance - can it move? @ 2013/07/26 00:20:18


Post by: Mr. Shine


 DeathReaper wrote:
The Multi-tracker would need to say: Even when firing ordnance, for there to be a conflict.


If it explicitly stated such then there would be no conflict, because it was explicitly stated, surely?


Riptide Firing Ordnance - can it move? @ 2013/07/26 00:22:13


Post by: DeathReaper


 Mr. Shine wrote:
 DeathReaper wrote:
The Multi-tracker would need to say: Even when firing ordnance, for there to be a conflict.


If it explicitly stated such then there would be no conflict, because it was explicitly stated, surely?

See there is the issue, you are misunderstanding the conflict.

Snapshot says the BS can not be modified. Pinpoint says that you can modify the BS of a snapshot.

There is a conflict as one says cant and one says can. Usually Can't Trumps Must (Or may), but since the codex > than BRB, and with pinpoint there is a conflict, then Pinpoint (May) trumps Snapshot (Can't) because there is a conflict.


Riptide Firing Ordnance - can it move? @ 2013/07/26 00:29:33


Post by: Mr. Shine


 DeathReaper wrote:
See there is the issue, you are misunderstanding the conflict.

Snapshot says the BS can not be modified. Pinpoint says that you can modify the BS of a snapshot.

There is a conflict as one says cant and one says can. Usually Can't Trumps Must (Or may), but since the codex > than BRB, and with pinpoint there is a conflict, then Pinpoint (May) trumps Snapshot (Can't) because there is a conflict.


I think we're disagreeing on the nature of conflict and when we must refer to BRB pg. 7. There's no point in stating that Pinpoint is an exception to Snap Shot if you then have to refer to BRB pg. 7 as a conflict. It seems self-evident that if the rule explicitly states it overrides something then it overrides it, without requiring reference elsewhere (BRB pg. 7) to clear it up.

The point of explicitly stating it is to avoid creating a conflict and thus invoking BRB pg. 7.


Riptide Firing Ordnance - can it move? @ 2013/07/26 00:40:47


Post by: rigeld2


Ignoring page 7, which rule "wins" in Snap Shot vs Pinpoint and why?
Cite rules please, again ignoring page 7.


Riptide Firing Ordnance - can it move? @ 2013/07/26 00:45:03


Post by: Crimson


If you cannot fire any weapons, you cannot fire any weapons regardless of how many you can normally fire.

If you cannot fire any other weapons, you cannot fire any other weapons regardless of how many you can normally fire.


Riptide Firing Ordnance - can it move? @ 2013/07/26 00:55:09


Post by: Mr. Shine


rigeld2 wrote:
Ignoring page 7, which rule "wins" in Snap Shot vs Pinpoint and why?
Cite rules please, again ignoring page 7.


If you're trying to point out that there is a conflict between the rules without pg. 7 and thus we must refer to pg. 7, I think I should have been more clear in my comments I assume you're basing your question on. When I mentioned referring to pg. 7 I meant the Codex/BRB conflict portion. I think we take it as a given that specificied exceptions overrule general rules as iterated by advanced > basic.


Riptide Firing Ordnance - can it move? @ 2013/07/26 01:19:46


Post by: rigeld2


 Mr. Shine wrote:
rigeld2 wrote:
Ignoring page 7, which rule "wins" in Snap Shot vs Pinpoint and why?
Cite rules please, again ignoring page 7.


If you're trying to point out that there is a conflict between the rules without pg. 7 and thus we must refer to pg. 7, I think I should have been more clear in my comments I assume you're basing your question on. When I mentioned referring to pg. 7 I meant the Codex/BRB conflict portion. I think we take it as a given that specificied exceptions overrule general rules as iterated by advanced > basic.

You do realize that the codex/BRB rule is the same as the advanced/basic rule, right?
Like - literally the exact same thing.


Riptide Firing Ordnance - can it move? @ 2013/07/26 01:30:21


Post by: Fragile


 Mr. Shine wrote:
Fragile wrote:
How many weapons can a typical suit fire?


Two; typically Tau Battlesuits have Multi-trackers.


And that is all the MT does really. It give permission for the suits to fire two weapons instead of one that every other normal infantry does. It grants no other permissions to break any other rule.

The Riptide gets 3 just because the MC rules stack with MT rules.



Riptide Firing Ordnance - can it move? @ 2013/07/26 01:50:45


Post by: Happyjew


For the Ord+1 side.

I have a model equipped with assault grenades.
Assault grenades used in combat says I can only make one attack regardless of Attacks profile or bonus attacks.
My model also has a piece of codex-specific wargear that grants +D3 attacks.

If I use the assault grenades in cc, how many attacks do I get to make and why?


Riptide Firing Ordnance - can it move? @ 2013/07/26 01:55:24


Post by: Mike94656


 Happyjew wrote:
For the Ord+1 side.

I have a model equipped with assault grenades.
Assault grenades used in combat says I can only make one attack regardless of Attacks profile or bonus attacks.
My model also has a piece of codex-specific wargear that grants +D3 attacks.

If I use the assault grenades in cc, how many attacks do I get to make and why?


You would get one attack. Assault grenades says one attack, regardless. No ifs, ands or buts. If they codex wargear said something to the affect of even when using assault grenades, then you would be granted the additional attacks.

Just like in this discussion, the ordinance rules and pretty straight forward, fire it, then nothing else. MT does nothing to affect this. You could have the ability to fire 28934505 weapons, but if one is ordinance, and your wargear or special rule doesn't include ignoring this restriction, then the restriction stands. If MT said it ignored the restriction, then you have the conflict where codex would win. No wording to ignore the restriction equals no conflict.


Riptide Firing Ordnance - can it move? @ 2013/07/26 02:25:51


Post by: Happyjew


Mike94656 wrote:
 Happyjew wrote:
For the Ord+1 side.

I have a model equipped with assault grenades.
Assault grenades used in combat says I can only make one attack regardless of Attacks profile or bonus attacks.
My model also has a piece of codex-specific wargear that grants +D3 attacks.

If I use the assault grenades in cc, how many attacks do I get to make and why?


You would get one attack. Assault grenades says one attack, regardless. No ifs, ands or buts. If they codex wargear said something to the affect of even when using assault grenades, then you would be granted the additional attacks.

Just like in this discussion, the ordinance rules and pretty straight forward, fire it, then nothing else. MT does nothing to affect this. You could have the ability to fire 28934505 weapons, but if one is ordinance, and your wargear or special rule doesn't include ignoring this restriction, then the restriction stands. If MT said it ignored the restriction, then you have the conflict where codex would win. No wording to ignore the restriction equals no conflict.


There is a reason why I asked the side that says you can fire Ordnance +1 weapon.


Riptide Firing Ordnance - can it move? @ 2013/07/26 02:26:45


Post by: Mr. Shine


rigeld2 wrote:
You do realize that the codex/BRB rule is the same as the advanced/basic rule, right?
Like - literally the exact same thing.


It's somewhat more specific. In the case of BRB/BRB conflicts, precedence is given to advanced rules over basic. No guidance is given for BRB advanced vs. advanced conflicts. In the case of Codex vs. BRB conflicts we know that advanced > basic, but if we're given a Codex advanced vs. BRB advanced conflict we then know that the Codex advanced rule has precedence over the BRB advanced rule.

Fragile wrote:
And that is all the MT does really. It give permission for the suits to fire two weapons instead of one that every other normal infantry does. It grants no other permissions to break any other rule.

The Riptide gets 3 just because the MC rules stack with MT rules.


Except by allowing suits to fire an additional weapon you're conflicting with the ordnance rule of firing only one weapon. Given that there is a conflict we must refer to the Codex vs. BRB rules on BRB pg. 7 and we're told to give precedence to the Codex rule.

 Happyjew wrote:
For the Ord+1 side.

I have a model equipped with assault grenades.
Assault grenades used in combat says I can only make one attack regardless of Attacks profile or bonus attacks.
My model also has a piece of codex-specific wargear that grants +D3 attacks.

If I use the assault grenades in cc, how many attacks do I get to make and why?


I don't have my rulebook on me, but assuming the wargear's description says "may make an additional D3 attacks" and assuming the rules for assault grenades do not somehow exclude other possibilities, then sure, 1+D3. Maybe I can answer this better after work.

Again, Games Workshop have never written the most straightforward, sensible or consistent rules and I absolutely think you should streamline or interpret them however makes best sense to you and your group, but this is a rules discussion forum so, with that caveat, I am just going on what the rules say.


Riptide Firing Ordnance - can it move? @ 2013/07/26 02:27:49


Post by: Mike94656


 Mr. Shine wrote:
rigeld2 wrote:
You do realize that the codex/BRB rule is the same as the advanced/basic rule, right?
Like - literally the exact same thing.


It's somewhat more specific. In the case of BRB/BRB conflicts, precedence is given to advanced rules over basic. No guidance is given for BRB advanced vs. advanced conflicts. In the case of Codex vs. BRB conflicts we know that advanced > basic, but if we're given a Codex advanced vs. BRB advanced conflict we then know that the Codex advanced rule has precedence over the BRB advanced rule.

Fragile wrote:
And that is all the MT does really. It give permission for the suits to fire two weapons instead of one that every other normal infantry does. It grants no other permissions to break any other rule.

The Riptide gets 3 just because the MC rules stack with MT rules.


Except by allowing suits to fire an additional weapon you're conflicting with the ordnance rule of firing only one weapon. Given that there is a conflict we must refer to the Codex vs. BRB rules on BRB pg. 7 and we're told to give precedence to the Codex rule.

 Happyjew wrote:
For the Ord+1 side.

I have a model equipped with assault grenades.
Assault grenades used in combat says I can only make one attack regardless of Attacks profile or bonus attacks.
My model also has a piece of codex-specific wargear that grants +D3 attacks.

If I use the assault grenades in cc, how many attacks do I get to make and why?


I don't have my rulebook on me, but assuming the wargear's description says "may make an additional D3 attacks" and assuming the rules for assault grenades do not somehow exclude other possibilities, then sure, 1+D3. Maybe I can answer this better after work.

Again, Games Workshop have never written the most straightforward, sensible or consistent rules and I absolutely think you should streamline or interpret them however makes best sense to you and your group, but this is a rules discussion forum so, with that caveat, I am just going on what the rules say.


I am at a loss here. How is this getting interpreted any other way. If there is a rule that states you get one attack REGARDLESS of other bonuses or attack profiles, how are you still adding in the D3 attacks? Perhaps regardless means something different that I am not aware of. As is in the case of this argument, if you have something that says you can do X, and a BRB rule that states if you do Y, you cannot then do X, how are people claiming you can still do X, when it isn't stated ANYWHERE to ignore the rule.


Riptide Firing Ordnance - can it move? @ 2013/07/26 03:00:22


Post by: rigeld2


 Mr. Shine wrote:
rigeld2 wrote:
You do realize that the codex/BRB rule is the same as the advanced/basic rule, right?
Like - literally the exact same thing.


It's somewhat more specific. In the case of BRB/BRB conflicts, precedence is given to advanced rules over basic. No guidance is given for BRB advanced vs. advanced conflicts. In the case of Codex vs. BRB conflicts we know that advanced > basic, but if we're given a Codex advanced vs. BRB advanced conflict we then know that the Codex advanced rule has precedence over the BRB advanced rule.

First question, why do you assume that the Multitracker is an advanced rule?
Second question, have you been able to demonstrate a conflict yet?

Edit: also, thanks for showing my Carnifexes assault into terrain with a 3 init even without grenades.


Riptide Firing Ordnance - can it move? @ 2013/07/26 03:09:14


Post by: Mike94656


Hooray for carnifex buffs!


Riptide Firing Ordnance - can it move? @ 2013/07/26 03:13:13


Post by: Steel-W0LF


Mike94656 wrote:
Hooray for carnifex buffs!


Carnifex has no codex rule granting it extra shooting attacks.


Riptide Firing Ordnance - can it move? @ 2013/07/26 04:00:44


Post by: DeathReaper


 Steel-W0LF wrote:
Mike94656 wrote:
Hooray for carnifex buffs!


Carnifex has no codex rule granting it extra shooting attacks.

he was referring to Rig's post:

rigeld2 wrote:
Edit: also, thanks for showing my Carnifexes assault into terrain with a 3 init even without grenades.


The Carnifex has a Codex rule called living battering ram that adds 2 to its initiative score the turn it assaults.

We know that you need assault grenades or you swing at I1.

But by your definition of a conflict the Carnifex makes his attacks at I3 when he assaults through difficult terrain, which of course is not how it works because there is nothing in the Codex that says it overrides the restriction in the BRB about assaulting through terrain.


Riptide Firing Ordnance - can it move? @ 2013/07/26 04:32:18


Post by: Steel-W0LF


 DeathReaper wrote:
 Steel-W0LF wrote:
Mike94656 wrote:
Hooray for carnifex buffs!


Carnifex has no codex rule granting it extra shooting attacks.

he was referring to Rig's post:

rigeld2 wrote:
Edit: also, thanks for showing my Carnifexes assault into terrain with a 3 init even without grenades.


The Carnifex has a Codex rule called living battering ram that adds 2 to its initiative score the turn it assaults.

We know that you need assault grenades or you swing at I1.

But by your definition of a conflict the Carnifex makes his attacks at I3 when he assaults through difficult terrain, which of course is not how it works because there is nothing in the Codex that says it overrides the restriction in the BRB about assaulting through terrain.


Statline modifiers are set. Do you need the page number that explains the math that makes the codex rule not apply when assaulting into cover?

Because there is a rule that covers that.


Riptide Firing Ordnance - can it move? @ 2013/07/26 04:36:03


Post by: DeathReaper


I do not need them explained, I was simply pointing out to what they were referring.


Riptide Firing Ordnance - can it move? @ 2013/07/26 04:37:16


Post by: Steel-W0LF


 DeathReaper wrote:
I do not need them explained, I was simply pointing out to what they were referring.


And the example they gave was irrelevant and wrong from the get go.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
 Steel-W0LF wrote:
 DeathReaper wrote:
I do not need them explained, I was simply pointing out to what they were referring.


And the example they gave was irrelevant and wrong from the get go.


Sorry. I'm tracking now. I've ignored the user that started that line of thought so was missing 1/2 the conversation. Thought you were implying something you were not.


Riptide Firing Ordnance - can it move? @ 2013/07/26 07:23:13


Post by: Bausk


Well that was a fun nine and a bit page read. Some of the 'veterans' of the site came up with some ridiculous counter arguments that bordered on being childish. These counterarguments have been closer to comparing apples and oranges. Even one of the best counter points with the Assault grenade + d3 A is flawed from the basis that its a characteristic, subject to different rules. The best counter point or closest approximation would be power of the machine spirit, which I believe is worded the same as the multi-tracker. "May fire an additional weapon in the shooting phase" or some such.

But I digress...

I get the Pro+1 weapon argument from the stand point that firing an ordinance weapon IS firing a weapon in the shooting phase. And their argument is that the +1 is in addition to the ordinance weapon fired. A basic 1+1 weapon argument.

I also see the real argument for the Con+1 weapon argument. The ordinance weapon type rule states that it disallows any other weapon from being fired if the ordinance weapon is fired. Its not a matter of 0+1 weapon, its more a matter of the rule disallowing any weapons being fired other than the ordinance weapon. From this stand point that includes additional weapons.

Both sides have a decent case, but until this is FAQ'd I'd lean towards only firing the ordinance weapon.


Riptide Firing Ordnance - can it move? @ 2013/07/26 07:59:07


Post by: Steel-W0LF


 Bausk wrote:
Well that was a fun nine and a bit page read. Some of the 'veterans' of the site came up with some ridiculous counter arguments that bordered on being childish. These counterarguments have been closer to comparing apples and oranges. Even one of the best counter points with the Assault grenade + d3 A is flawed from the basis that its a characteristic, subject to different rules. The best counter point or closest approximation would be power of the machine spirit, which I believe is worded the same as the multi-tracker. "May fire an additional weapon in the shooting phase" or some such.

But I digress...

I get the Pro+1 weapon argument from the stand point that firing an ordinance weapon IS firing a weapon in the shooting phase. And their argument is that the +1 is in addition to the ordinance weapon fired. A basic 1+1 weapon argument.

I also see the real argument for the Con+1 weapon argument. The ordinance weapon type rule states that it disallows any other weapon from being fired if the ordinance weapon is fired. Its not a matter of 0+1 weapon, its more a matter of the rule disallowing any weapons being fired other than the ordinance weapon. From this stand point that includes additional weapons.

Both sides have a decent case, but until this is FAQ'd I'd lean towards only firing the ordinance weapon.


You've stated both sides very succinctly and I wont say you are wrong. I'd choose to play it differently, but you are at least understanding both sides before making the decision. Most of the comparisons here have been borderline window-licking.


Riptide Firing Ordnance - can it move? @ 2013/07/26 08:03:22


Post by: Ratius


Well that was a fun nine and a bit page read. Some of the 'veterans' of the site came up with some ridiculous counter arguments that bordered on being childish. These counterarguments have been closer to comparing apples and oranges. Even one of the best counter points with the Assault grenade + d3 A is flawed from the basis that its a characteristic, subject to different rules. The best counter point or closest approximation would be power of the machine spirit, which I believe is worded the same as the multi-tracker. "May fire an additional weapon in the shooting phase" or some such.

But I digress...

I get the Pro+1 weapon argument from the stand point that firing an ordinance weapon IS firing a weapon in the shooting phase. And their argument is that the +1 is in addition to the ordinance weapon fired. A basic 1+1 weapon argument.

I also see the real argument for the Con+1 weapon argument. The ordinance weapon type rule states that it disallows any other weapon from being fired if the ordinance weapon is fired. Its not a matter of 0+1 weapon, its more a matter of the rule disallowing any weapons being fired other than the ordinance weapon. From this stand point that includes additional weapons.

Both sides have a decent case, but until this is FAQ'd I'd lean towards only firing the ordinance weapon.



You've stated both sides very succinctly and I wont say you are wrong. I'd choose to play it differently, but you are at least understanding both sides before making the decision. Most of the comparisons here have been borderline window-licking.


Agreed, I gave up after page 4 but this is a great little summation.
Im erring on the Con side myself because the Rip is armed with a weapon that has Type: Ordinance. Hence the ordinance rules must be referenced and subsequently adherred to.


Riptide Firing Ordnance - can it move? @ 2013/07/26 08:07:13


Post by: Steel-W0LF


 Ratius wrote:
Well that was a fun nine and a bit page read. Some of the 'veterans' of the site came up with some ridiculous counter arguments that bordered on being childish. These counterarguments have been closer to comparing apples and oranges. Even one of the best counter points with the Assault grenade + d3 A is flawed from the basis that its a characteristic, subject to different rules. The best counter point or closest approximation would be power of the machine spirit, which I believe is worded the same as the multi-tracker. "May fire an additional weapon in the shooting phase" or some such.

But I digress...

I get the Pro+1 weapon argument from the stand point that firing an ordinance weapon IS firing a weapon in the shooting phase. And their argument is that the +1 is in addition to the ordinance weapon fired. A basic 1+1 weapon argument.

I also see the real argument for the Con+1 weapon argument. The ordinance weapon type rule states that it disallows any other weapon from being fired if the ordinance weapon is fired. Its not a matter of 0+1 weapon, its more a matter of the rule disallowing any weapons being fired other than the ordinance weapon. From this stand point that includes additional weapons.

Both sides have a decent case, but until this is FAQ'd I'd lean towards only firing the ordinance weapon.



You've stated both sides very succinctly and I wont say you are wrong. I'd choose to play it differently, but you are at least understanding both sides before making the decision. Most of the comparisons here have been borderline window-licking.


Agreed, I gave up after page 4 but this is a great little summation.
Im erring on the Con side myself because the Rip is armed with a weapon that has Type: Ordinance. Hence the ordinance rules must be referenced and subsequently adherred to.


I'll trade it all for a 3rd weapon on the thing so it can actually fire 3 like its allowed to in non-ordnance mode?


Riptide Firing Ordnance - can it move? @ 2013/07/26 08:30:12


Post by: HawaiiMatt


So if a monstrous riptide had 6 different ordnance pistols, could he fire them all thanks to the Monstrous Gunslinging Multi-tracker Rule?

-Matt


Riptide Firing Ordnance - can it move? @ 2013/07/26 08:40:11


Post by: Bausk


 Steel-W0LF wrote:
 Ratius wrote:
Well that was a fun nine and a bit page read. Some of the 'veterans' of the site came up with some ridiculous counter arguments that bordered on being childish. These counterarguments have been closer to comparing apples and oranges. Even one of the best counter points with the Assault grenade + d3 A is flawed from the basis that its a characteristic, subject to different rules. The best counter point or closest approximation would be power of the machine spirit, which I believe is worded the same as the multi-tracker. "May fire an additional weapon in the shooting phase" or some such.

But I digress...

I get the Pro+1 weapon argument from the stand point that firing an ordinance weapon IS firing a weapon in the shooting phase. And their argument is that the +1 is in addition to the ordinance weapon fired. A basic 1+1 weapon argument.

I also see the real argument for the Con+1 weapon argument. The ordinance weapon type rule states that it disallows any other weapon from being fired if the ordinance weapon is fired. Its not a matter of 0+1 weapon, its more a matter of the rule disallowing any weapons being fired other than the ordinance weapon. From this stand point that includes additional weapons.

Both sides have a decent case, but until this is FAQ'd I'd lean towards only firing the ordinance weapon.



You've stated both sides very succinctly and I wont say you are wrong. I'd choose to play it differently, but you are at least understanding both sides before making the decision. Most of the comparisons here have been borderline window-licking.


Agreed, I gave up after page 4 but this is a great little summation.
Im erring on the Con side myself because the Rip is armed with a weapon that has Type: Ordinance. Hence the ordinance rules must be referenced and subsequently adherred to.


I'll trade it all for a 3rd weapon on the thing so it can actually fire 3 like its allowed to in non-ordnance mode?


1ord or upto 3 non-ord would be my understanding (MC+MT).

EDIT: But also the original question of move and fire ordinance on a MC. Go for gold (thats loosly translated as 'yes'), MCs are similar to walkers like that.


Riptide Firing Ordnance - can it move? @ 2013/07/26 09:13:42


Post by: Nem


There’s plenty of examples already put forward. I’d like to go back to the most relevant, where reading through the pages a few times (Obviously a very busy Friday here), its been dodged a few times and Pro +1 side have failed to answered it.


From page 1.

It’s just like shooting missiles from a storm raven,

Yes Power of the machine spirit lets you fire one additional WEAPON,

But you cannot fire more than 2 missiles still, because the specific missile rule is 2 per turn


A direct precedent concerned with the same type of enhancement. You cannot fire more than 2 missiles, even though the codex says you can fire one additional weapon

No one has put forward why MT works differently with ordinance concerning overriding the restrictions presented in the ordinance rule.

We can see it’s not because it’s a codex rule, because of the PoTMS example.

There are also an abundance of examples that could be put forward which show codex rules cannot always be implemented and do not always override BRB rules. I appreciate the rules are not actually very easy to understand at all, but I do get annoyed when I read pages and pages of ‘Codex beats BRB’ and spamming page 7 without regard for context.

I don’t think you’re going to get much more however, as this thread is quickly moving towards insulting, I don’t think people who are spending their time and knowledge trying to help you understand the structure of the rules (People are not always right about everything, but at least you should appreciate they know a lot more than you about these things) deserve their efforts being labeled as ‘Childish’ or ‘Window-licking’ because of your failing to understand where they are coming from.


MC's can normally fire 2 weapons. MT give you the ability to fire one more weapon than normal, so you can now fire 3 weapons.
Ordinance stops you firing any other weapon that phase, it doesn’t matter how many you could fire, the Riptide does not have the ability to override this restriction.


Riptide Firing Ordnance - can it move? @ 2013/07/26 09:39:43


Post by: Godless-Mimicry


 Steel-W0LF wrote:
End of story. Arguing otherwise negates all kinds of "codex trumps.." rulings. It just doesn't float.


The irony here is when you say something like this it basically invalidates all your previous arguments by basically saying, 'hi, I can't come up with a decent argument because I'm not sure I'm actually right.' So yes, it is end of story, just not the ending you were looking for, which is a shame because though I disagreed with you all along, your arguments up until this piece of WTF were rather solid.


Riptide Firing Ordnance - can it move? @ 2013/07/26 10:14:02


Post by: bluedestiny


Sorry, i don't understand why a Riptide can't shoot another weapon. Here is my view on it:

-Riptide only have 2 weapon. A "primary" weapon and a TL weapon, so whats the use of a MT???

-BRB states Ordnance weapon fired by non-vechicle model, it cannot fire other weapon that phase and the MT states the model can fire an additional weapon in the shooting phase.
So that means I can fire an additional weapon in the shooting phase, i don't see a conflict there at all because MT clearly say I can shoot an additional weapon in the shooting phase.

Verdict: Yes, you can shoot the big gun and shoot with the remaining weapon.


Riptide Firing Ordnance - can it move? @ 2013/07/26 11:28:03


Post by: acekevin8412


Mike94656 wrote:
 Happyjew wrote:
For the Ord+1 side.

I have a model equipped with assault grenades.
Assault grenades used in combat says I can only make one attack regardless of Attacks profile or bonus attacks.
My model also has a piece of codex-specific wargear that grants +D3 attacks.

If I use the assault grenades in cc, how many attacks do I get to make and why?


You would get one attack. Assault grenades says one attack, regardless. No ifs, ands or buts. If they codex wargear said something to the affect of even when using assault grenades, then you would be granted the additional attacks.

Just like in this discussion, the ordinance rules and pretty straight forward, fire it, then nothing else. MT does nothing to affect this. You could have the ability to fire 28934505 weapons, but if one is ordinance, and your wargear or special rule doesn't include ignoring this restriction, then the restriction stands. If MT said it ignored the restriction, then you have the conflict where codex would win. No wording to ignore the restriction equals no conflict.

Well this has gotten me convinced. I now firmly agree against additional weapons.


Riptide Firing Ordnance - can it move? @ 2013/07/26 12:18:46


Post by: Stratos


 bluedestiny wrote:
Sorry, i don't understand why a Riptide can't shoot another weapon. Here is my view on it:

-Riptide only have 2 weapon. A "primary" weapon and a TL weapon, so whats the use of a MT???

-BRB states Ordnance weapon fired by non-vechicle model, it cannot fire other weapon that phase and the MT states the model can fire an additional weapon in the shooting phase.
So that means I can fire an additional weapon in the shooting phase, i don't see a conflict there at all because MT clearly say I can shoot an additional weapon in the shooting phase.

Verdict: Yes, you can shoot the big gun and shoot with the remaining weapon.


So my Wind rider jet bikes can run ? Cool.

But seriously i think Battle Focus is a good example here the rule says models can either shoot and run or run then shoot. Jet bikes cant run because the BRB says they cant but my codex says they can as per the Tau side of the argument on Conflict there is a conflict there my codex wins and i may now Run with my jet bikes.

If i'm missing something here please point it out but i don't really think i am.



Riptide Firing Ordnance - can it move? @ 2013/07/26 12:23:21


Post by: shamikebab


 bluedestiny wrote:

-Riptide only have 2 weapon. A "primary" weapon and a TL weapon, so whats the use of a MT???


Why do Jetbikes have battle focus?

Why can an Avatar buy night vision?


Riptide Firing Ordnance - can it move? @ 2013/07/26 12:24:46


Post by: Quark


Stratos wrote:
So my Wind rider jet bikes can run ? Cool.

But seriously i think Battle Focus is a good example here the rule says models can either shoot and run or run then shoot. Jet bikes cant run because the BRB says they cant but my codex says they can as per the Tau side of the argument on Conflict there is a conflict there my codex wins and i may now Run with my jet bikes.

If i'm missing something here please point it out but i don't really think i am.



Of the many counter-examples to Codex always beats Rulebook, this is my favorite yet.


Riptide Firing Ordnance - can it move? @ 2013/07/26 12:28:52


Post by: shamikebab


It's not actually. The Battle Focus rule specifically says it doesn't apply to jetbikes.


Riptide Firing Ordnance - can it move? @ 2013/07/26 13:36:34


Post by: quirthanon


I think it's the very definition of ‘conflict’ that’s the difference here. One side says there’s no conflict and one does. This of course leads to applying the rules differently, resulting in the current discussion. The word conflict is only in the rules section once, and the other uses are in fluff sections. The BRB FAQ does not use the word conflict at all.

So why don’t the sides try to explain what their definition of conflict is and try to hash out a common definition. This would result in a more uniform application of the rules.


Riptide Firing Ordnance - can it move? @ 2013/07/26 13:38:57


Post by: rigeld2


quirthanon wrote:
I think it's the very definition of ‘conflict’ that’s the difference here. One side says there’s no conflict and one does. This of course leads to applying the rules differently, resulting in the current discussion. The word conflict is only in the rules section once, and the other uses are in fluff sections. The BRB FAQ does not use the word conflict at all.

So why don’t the sides try to explain what their definition of conflict is and try to hash out a common definition. This would result in a more uniform application of the rules.

The con side has explained, in addition to providing examples.


Riptide Firing Ordnance - can it move? @ 2013/07/26 13:41:34


Post by: shamikebab


I think both sides have explained their reasoning fairly clearly (although one side has been overly dramatic at times)

I'm leaning towards the con at the moment but I can see why people would think the other way. Until GW stop putting wargear and abilities in that offer no benefits to the unit it will lead to confusion.


Riptide Firing Ordnance - can it move? @ 2013/07/26 13:43:42


Post by: rigeld2


 Steel-W0LF wrote:
Statline modifiers are set. Do you need the page number that explains the math that makes the codex rule not apply when assaulting into cover?

Because there is a rule that covers that.

The assaulting into difficult terrain rule says that I must attack at Initiative 1 regardless of other modifiers.
I have a codex rule that adds 2 to my initiative.

Why is 1+2 not 3?


Riptide Firing Ordnance - can it move? @ 2013/07/26 14:16:20


Post by: quirthanon


rigeld2 wrote:
quirthanon wrote:
I think it's the very definition of ‘conflict’ that’s the difference here. One side says there’s no conflict and one does. This of course leads to applying the rules differently, resulting in the current discussion. The word conflict is only in the rules section once, and the other uses are in fluff sections. The BRB FAQ does not use the word conflict at all.

So why don’t the sides try to explain what their definition of conflict is and try to hash out a common definition. This would result in a more uniform application of the rules.

The con side has explained, in addition to providing examples.



Could you point me to these posts? After re-reading the posts all I can find are assertions that it is or is not a conflict. No one has defined what they think conflict means, at least that I can find. I hope I didn't miss it.


Riptide Firing Ordnance - can it move? @ 2013/07/26 14:29:10


Post by: Miri


rigeld2 wrote:
 Steel-W0LF wrote:
Statline modifiers are set. Do you need the page number that explains the math that makes the codex rule not apply when assaulting into cover?

Because there is a rule that covers that.

The assaulting into difficult terrain rule says that I must attack at Initiative 1 regardless of other modifiers.
I have a codex rule that adds 2 to my initiative.

Why is 1+2 not 3?


Because Initiative is a Characteristic value and page 2 clearly defines how to modify those. Multiplies first, additions and subtractions and then finally set values.


Riptide Firing Ordnance - can it move? @ 2013/07/26 14:31:03


Post by: HawaiiMatt


From what I've read, the definitions of conflict in this thread are abstract and circular.

If you have to have a codex rule specifically call out by example that it breaks a BRB rule, such as marker light, then we have almost no cases of Codex > BRB.

If you only have to have Codex give a vague bonus and BRB gives a different bonus, we have a ton of rules were Codex > BRB, included init 3 Carnifexes charging into cover.

Sadly, I think that GW uses the latter on a case by base basis, rather that having cleanly written rules.

-Matt


Riptide Firing Ordnance - can it move? @ 2013/07/26 14:31:07


Post by: rigeld2


 Miri wrote:
rigeld2 wrote:
 Steel-W0LF wrote:
Statline modifiers are set. Do you need the page number that explains the math that makes the codex rule not apply when assaulting into cover?

Because there is a rule that covers that.

The assaulting into difficult terrain rule says that I must attack at Initiative 1 regardless of other modifiers.
I have a codex rule that adds 2 to my initiative.

Why is 1+2 not 3?


Because Initiative is a Characteristic value and page 2 clearly defines how to modify those. Multiplies first, additions and subtractions and then finally set values.

Difficult terrain is not changing my Initiative value. It sets where I'm supposed to attack.
My initiative is 3 when I assault. This generates a conflict as to when I'd swing (according to the pro side).
The codex wins - I swing at I3.


Riptide Firing Ordnance - can it move? @ 2013/07/26 14:32:56


Post by: hyv3mynd


 Miri wrote:
rigeld2 wrote:
 Steel-W0LF wrote:
Statline modifiers are set. Do you need the page number that explains the math that makes the codex rule not apply when assaulting into cover?

Because there is a rule that covers that.

The assaulting into difficult terrain rule says that I must attack at Initiative 1 regardless of other modifiers.
I have a codex rule that adds 2 to my initiative.

Why is 1+2 not 3?


Because Initiative is a Characteristic value and page 2 clearly defines how to modify those. Multiplies first, additions and subtractions and then finally set values.


But this creates a conflict with the +2i from the tyranid codex (using the assertion that ordnance and multi-trackers are in conflict) and the tyranid codex would prevail.


Riptide Firing Ordnance - can it move? @ 2013/07/26 16:55:59


Post by: Steel-W0LF


 hyv3mynd wrote:
 Miri wrote:
rigeld2 wrote:
 Steel-W0LF wrote:
Statline modifiers are set. Do you need the page number that explains the math that makes the codex rule not apply when assaulting into cover?

Because there is a rule that covers that.

The assaulting into difficult terrain rule says that I must attack at Initiative 1 regardless of other modifiers.
I have a codex rule that adds 2 to my initiative.

Why is 1+2 not 3?


Because Initiative is a Characteristic value and page 2 clearly defines how to modify those. Multiplies first, additions and subtractions and then finally set values.


But this creates a conflict with the +2i from the tyranid codex (using the assertion that ordnance and multi-trackers are in conflict) and the tyranid codex would prevail.


I cant believe this example is still being discussed...

Its a statline modifier. It has a set process for the order the math is done in. If you add in the +2 from the codex, but do everything in order, you STILL end up ay Init 1.


Riptide Firing Ordnance - can it move? @ 2013/07/26 17:04:02


Post by: ClockworkZion


I'm in the "no additional weapons" camp personally. The thing is that allowing it creates a prescient that breaks the game when you apply it to similar items (like the Trukk with a RPJ). I personally feel that any time interpretation of a rule can create a situation that breaks the game it should be ruled against on principle of keeping the game fun for all players.

That said I sent the question into GW, so we'll see if they put it in the FAQs in the future.