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

So after that dozen page long thread a while ago debating whether or not Anrakyr may use his Mind in the Machine power from the Catacomb Command Barge, it was decided that simply not using the power from the CCB would be best. However, 6th edition is now out, and I'm wondering if that solution still stands. There is no longer any restriction on what passengers may fire from an Open-Topped transport, it simply says that they can (p. 82). Since there is no 6th edition rulebook FAQ to shatter my hopes and dreams, would Anrakyr be allowed to now use his power from the CCB?

From page 78 of the Warhammer 40K 6th edition rulebook:

A Fire Point is a hatch or gun slit from which one or more passengers inside the vehicle can fire shooting weapons (or use witchfire/psychic shooting attacks).

So just like 5th edition you can not use Anrakyr's power while embarked because the rules for Fire Points do not permit it.

So using that logic you cant shot from an open topped transport either as they would also need to use a "fire point" to shoot a gun (which, according to te above quote, works the same as a witchfire/psychic shooting attack).

I will be using it this way as i have already had this discussion with the 2 gaming groups i frequent and they agree (including the "hard core" tourney players).

Praxiss wrote:So using that logic you cant shot from an open topped transport either as they would also need to use a "fire point" to shoot a gun (which, according to te above quote, works the same as a witchfire/psychic shooting attack).

I will be using it this way as i have already had this discussion with the 2 gaming groups i frequent and they agree (including the "hard core" tourney players).

Take a look at the open topped rules for this quote, "Open-topped Transports do not have specific fire points. Instead, all passengers in an open-topped transport can fire, measuring range and line of sight from any point on the hull of the vehicle." Notice the rule says fire, as Mind in the Machine is not "firing" (Meaning not shooting a weapon), it will be unable to work out of a CCB. We don't have permission to measure for a special rule out of the barge, but he does have permission to shoot out of it.

And what gives you the idea that open-topped vehicles don't have Fire Points? The rules are clear that they do, its just not a specific point on the vehicle.

Regardless of how you and your group want to house rule it, that is all it is. Mind in the Machine is not a shooting weapon, witchfire or a psychic shooting attack and thus can not be used from a Fire Point.

what about his tachyon arrow? pretty hard to argue that its not a shooting attack.

LordoftheCron wrote:what about his tachyon arrow? pretty hard to argue that its not a shooting attack.

There's never been any debate about the Tachyone Arrow. That is a shooting attack, no different from a HK Missile.

Ghaz wrote:And what gives you the idea that open-topped vehicles don't have Fire Points? The rules are clear that they do, its just not a specific point on the vehicle.

Permissive ruleset...it doesn't say that Open Top vehicles have a Fire Point (or Points). They don't. Models are simply free to fire drawing LoS from any point (not Fire Point ) on the vehicle. The absence of a so called 'specific fire point' does not logically or necessarily mean that a 'general' one exists. A Fire Point is a 'thing' in 40k much like 'exit hatch (or point..can't remember which), 'weapon arc', etc. If you want to claim that on OT vehicle has one or more Fire Points then I think you ought to show where it's called out in the rules.

Ghaz wrote:
Regardless of how you and your group want to house rule it, that is all it is. Mind in the Machine is not a shooting weapon, witchfire or a psychic shooting attack and thus can not be used from a Fire Point.

Which an Open Topped vehicle does not have.

-Yad

Yad wrote:Which an Open Topped vehicle does not have.

False. They don't have specific firing points. They must have a firing point as there are no rules for shooting from a vehicle without firing points.

rigeld2 wrote:

Yad wrote:Which an Open Topped vehicle does not have.

False. They don't have specific firing points. They must have a firing point as there are no rules for shooting from a vehicle without firing points.

True. Yes, they don't have specific firing points. But no, they don't need to have a firing point as the Open Top vehicles rules provide the mechanism by which embarked models may fire.

-Yad

Has anyone gotten the new digital necron coded and seen if MitM has been allowed to fire in a chariot?

MitM does not fire in any sense.

There are rules for shooting out of transports, but that's the only rule that gives any way for embarked models to draw LOS out of the vehcle.

Since MitM isn't a shooting attack, there's no rule giving you a way to get LOS out of a vehicle to use it.

Yad wrote:True. Yes, they don't have specific firing points. But no, they don't need to have a firing point as the Open Top vehicles rules provide the mechanism by which embarked models may fire.

False. The do indeed need a firing point to fire. They have one non-specific fire point that allows all of the models on board to fire. Those rules still do not permit the use of non-shooting special rules that require LOS to be used from an open topped vehicle. Mind in the Machine is not 'firing'.

Regretably no. Anrakyr (and indeed anyone using a LOS-requiring, non-shooting special ability of any kind that doesn't explicitly state otherwise) does not currently have permission within the rules to use said ability from inside a transport, open-topped or otherwise.

Yes it makes next to no sense that he can fire freely, attack things with his warscythe, etc., but not do whatever technomagic causes him to bend machines to his will from the confines of his command barge. Sadly unless (until?) it's FAQed otherwise, that is the rule as written.

Edit: just noticed this has already been said, so i'll just 'second' those who are saying it. Cross your fingers for an FAQ update!

Yad wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:

Yad wrote:Which an Open Topped vehicle does not have.

False. They don't have specific firing points. They must have a firing point as there are no rules for shooting from a vehicle without firing points.

True. Yes, they don't have specific firing points. But no, they don't need to have a firing point as the Open Top vehicles rules provide the mechanism by which embarked models may fire.

-Yad

Citation needed. Prove your assertion please.

Page 82
"Passengers Shooting from Open-Topped Transports"

*edit: Also RAW, Anrakyr is able to draw LoS from the CCB and could therefore use MitM.*

Mannahnin wrote:MitM does not fire in any sense.

Agreed.

Mannahnin wrote:
There are rules for shooting out of transports, but that's the only rule that gives any way for embarked models to draw LOS out of the vehcle.

I would amend your statement to, "There are rules for shooting and drawing line of sight out of transports". The rules for OT vehicles allow models to 'shoot and draw line of sight' from any point on the hull. Nowhere in the OT vehicles rules, as it pertains to shooting, does it formally define this point (or points) as an actual Fire Point.

Mannahnin wrote:Since MitM isn't a shooting attack, there's no rule giving you a way to get LOS out of a vehicle to use it.

That's where I disagree (not about the MitM being a shooting attack, I agree with that). You can shoot and you can draw line of sight from anywhere on the hull of an OT vehicle. Generally, models have to be able to draw line of sight in order to shoot. Why folks are then limiting it to only that action is something that I don't quite get.

Side question...was this topic addressed in the 5th edition rulebook FAQ or 5th edition Necron codex FAQ? If I remember correctly, it was ruled that Anrakyr could not use the MitM ability while embarked.

-Yad


Automatically Appended Next Post:

rigeld2 wrote:

Yad wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:

Yad wrote:Which an Open Topped vehicle does not have.

False. They don't have specific firing points. They must have a firing point as there are no rules for shooting from a vehicle without firing points.

True. Yes, they don't have specific firing points. But no, they don't need to have a firing point as the Open Top vehicles rules provide the mechanism by which embarked models may fire.

-Yad

Citation needed. Prove your assertion please.

Hmm, as we're discussing the OT vehicle rules, I would say that everything you need is right there. Models can shoot and draw line of sight from any point on the hull. Can you quote the rule that formally defines one or more fire points on an OT vehicle? Simply pointing to the sentence that states there is no specific fire point only tells me just that, that there is no specific one. In my opinion you need another statement that clearly defines an actual fire point. If only because a Fire Point is a clearly defined rule mechanic, and this is a permissive ruleset.

-Yad


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Ghaz wrote:

Yad wrote:True. Yes, they don't have specific firing points. But no, they don't need to have a firing point as the Open Top vehicles rules provide the mechanism by which embarked models may fire.

False. The do indeed need a firing point to fire.

Agreed, Models on a non-Open Topped transport do indeed need to have a Fire Point (or points) on their vehicle to be formally defined. On an OT vehicle, not so much.

Ghaz wrote: They have one non-specific fire point that allows all of the models on board to fire. Those rules still do not permit the use of non-shooting special rules that require LOS to be used from an open topped vehicle. Mind in the Machine is not 'firing'.

This strikes me as your own interpretation of the rule and not what it actually says. It doesn't say that OT vehicles have, "one non-specific fire point". It says that there are no specific fire points on an OT vehicle. The inverse is not necessarily true. It's 2:30AM and I don't have my rulebook with me, but does it even have the words, "one non-specific fire point"? Can you then clarify for me what it means when the OT rules say that models may shoot and draw line of sight from anywhere on the vehicle? Is it not equally true that one could say, "models can shoot and models can draw line of sight from anywhere on the vehicle"? If not, why? Why are you inextricably linking (and limiting) the action of drawing line of sight for the sole purposes of shooting? As soon as the OT rules give the player permission to draw line of sight (and shoot) from an OT vehicle you ought to be able to use any rule that requires the model to draw line of sight.

-Yad

If I say that I don't have a red car, does that mean I don't have a car at all? No. All it means is that my car is not red. Your logic by trying to claim that an open topped vehicle doesn't have fire points at all because it doesn't have a specific fire point is the same as saying I don't have a car because I don't have a red car.

Your logic also fails in regards to line of sight for open topped vehicles. From page 82 of the Warhammer 40K 6th edition rulebook:

Instead all passengers in an Open-topped Transport can fire, measuring range and line of sight from any point on the hull of the vehicle.

This still does not allow you to draw line of sight from an open topped vehicle for anything other than shooting. Mind in the Machine is not snooting and therefore those rules do not apply.

Page 82 wrote:Passengers Shooting From Open-Topped Transports
Open-topped Transports do not have specific Fire Points. Instead, all passengers in an Open-topped Transport can fire, measuring range and line of sight from any point on the hull of the vehicle.

This rule allows models to shoot out of open-topped transports. It does not grant permission to trace LOS for any other purpose. The Fire Point rules on page 78 are similar. They explicitly grant permission to fire, and to trace LOS from fire points for that purpose, but not for any other.

The rules regarding fire points and that open topped have no specific fire points has remained the same from 5th to 6th, i've checked and it is the same wording down to the full stops for both.

Just because the same question is not in the 6th ed FAQ does not mean GW's previous answer is any less valid now than it was for 5th ed, in other words the necron codex CCB has not errated to allow this, the 6th ed rules are exactly the same to 5th in relation to this so nothing has changed, so unless they FAQ it again and go in the total opposite direction as they did only half a year ago then its still a no to using the Mind in the Machine from a CCB.

Mannahnin wrote:

Page 82 wrote:Passengers Shooting From Open-Topped Transports
Open-topped Transports do not have specific Fire Points. Instead, all passengers in an Open-topped Transport can fire, measuring range and line of sight from any point on the hull of the vehicle.

This rule allows models to shoot out of open-topped transports. It does not grant permission to trace LOS for any other purpose. The Fire Point rules on page 78 are similar. They explicitly grant permission to fire, and to trace LOS from fire points for that purpose, but not for any other.

Page 82 specifically says you can "fire", "measure range" and "los". Because open topped transports don't have any specific fire points. It doesn't say draw los to fire; it says in addition to firing. All that is required is to be able to draw los for mitm. So yes, Anrakyr can mitm like a pimp. I suggest posing him on top of the barge like a surfer.

That is an INACCURATE quote. It states you can "fire, measuring range and line of sight.....". LOS and range are when firing, you have no permission to draw LOS for any other purpose.

nosferatu1001 wrote:That is an INACCURATE quote. It states you can "fire, measuring range and line of sight.....". LOS and range are when firing, you have no permission to draw LOS for any other purpose.

Sorry, even from your own quote. It doesn't say measure and Los for purposes of firing. It's fire, measure AND LOS. Measure and Los are in addition to firing. By your interpretation, it should have read. Measure, and line O sight to be able to fire. Sorry bro, Anrakyr is back. Welcome to 6th.

jspyd3rx wrote:

nosferatu1001 wrote:That is an INACCURATE quote. It states you can "fire, measuring range and line of sight.....". LOS and range are when firing, you have no permission to draw LOS for any other purpose.

Sorry, even from your own quote. It doesn't say measure and Los for purposes of firing. It's fire, measure AND LOS. Measure and Los are in addition to firing. By your interpretation, it should have read. Measure, and line O sight to be able to fire. Sorry bro, Anrakyr is back. Welcome to 6th.

Re-read the quote. Measuring LOS and range are tied directly to the act of firing. Without actually shooting, you have no permission to check range or LOS.

Re-read your quote. Measuring and drawing line of sight are in addition to firing. Basic English there. Toilet example! From a toilet you may pee AND poop. You don't have to poop to pee or pee to poop, but may pee and poop.

nothing to see here.

Basic english gives only one possible interpretation; jspyd3rx, you're missing the comma in sentence.
So while your toilet example does demonstrate that in normal language, "and" can mean either Logical OR or Logical AND, it is irrelevant in this discussion as normal shooting requires both measuring range AND line of sight.
(Also, in normal language "or" usually means Logical XOR, not Logical OR)

To parse the sentence:
"You may fire, measuring range and line of sight..."
Comma between fire and measuring means that the next partial sentence [measuring range and line of sight] is tied to the first sentence [You may fire]. In fact, it gives additional information on how to finish the required steps of shooting process.

jspyd3rx wrote:Re-read your quote. Measuring and drawing line of sight are in addition to firing. Basic English there. Toilet example! From a toilet you may pee AND poop. You don't have to poop to pee or pee to poop, but may pee and poop.

No.

You may fire, measuring range and LOS means you may fire, measuring LOS and fire, measuring range from the fire point. Basic E nglish comprehension only allows one possible parsing of that sentence, and yours is NOT it.

nosferatu1001 wrote:

jspyd3rx wrote:Re-read your quote. Measuring and drawing line of sight are in addition to firing. Basic English there. Toilet example! From a toilet you may pee AND poop. You don't have to poop to pee or pee to poop, but may pee and poop.

No.

You may fire, measuring range and LOS means you may fire, measuring LOS and fire, measuring range from the fire point. Basic E nglish comprehension only allows one possible parsing of that sentence, and yours is NOT it.

You can't change the quote to fit your definition. Btw, open topped vehicles do not have any specific fire points. Page 82. In a regular vehicle, to shoot out of one. You need a specific fire point. Page 78. Rules are not the same for closed vehicles with fire points and open topped vehicles without fire points. Open topped vehicles are NOT one big fire point; they don't need it as it wide open and specifically mentioned in page 82 as not having any. If the rule for what is allowed from open topped specifically stated measuring and drawing Los for the purpose of firing. I would have stated so and it does not. It states in addition to. The rule for firing out of a fire point is as specific as it needs to be. It is changed for firing from an open topped one. That's why there are two rules for it.

jspyd3rx wrote:You can't change the quote to fit your definition.

Yet that is exactly what you're doing. You're changing a quote that tells you how you fire from an open-topped vehicle to a carte blanche permission to draw line of sight for any reason you want. There is a reason that the rule you're quoting is in the section entitled 'Passenges Shooting From Open-Topped Transports and that is because that is the only situation in which those rules apply.