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.

@PierreTheMime
Tenet 2 of "you make da call"
2. The only official sources of information are the current rulebooks and the Games Workshop FAQs. Emails from Askyourquestion@games-workshop.com are technically official, but they are easily spoofed and should not be relied on.

This is also your 1st post, so you have no prior history to be characterized as reliable. I wouldn't count on anyone believing this "email" of yours...

Fair enough. I just figured I'd share. You're welcome to continue arguing the point but I have a suspicion that it will be resolved in FAQ update soon enough.

Edit:
Adding a screencap of my mail just for anyone interested. I suppose I could have spent hours completely replicating GMail images though.
http://i40.tinypic.com/bdvawy.png (I only have paint at work so I couldn't shrink it and still have it legible)

I hope it does too. Along with some other things...

nosferatu1001 wrote:Except it does affect open topped, as we've discussed here.

It also affects Njal

That's a nice assertion, but, well. . . still no actual evidence. Do you have something to contribute to the discussion?

Yes, its been contributed already.

Your argument is, at best, an assertion that the subject is unclear. Which it isnt, but that was your assertion

You then came to the conclusion that OT means no fire point, and have baldly stated that since.

It isnt unclear; having no specific destination doesnt mean you have no destination. No specific fire point does not mean no firepoint, no matter how many times you repeat yourself.

No you are just trying to convince that no firepoints=firepoints. OK then, no ceramite plating=ceramite plating. I like this new CCB even better.


Bottom end: A faq is given to restrict abilities through some transports. All other transports are unrestricted. It's as simple as that.

nosferatu1001 wrote:Yes, its been contributed already.

Your argument is, at best, an assertion that the subject is unclear. Which it isnt, but that was your assertion

You then came to the conclusion that OT means no fire point, and have baldly stated that since.

It isnt unclear; having no specific destination doesnt mean you have no destination. No specific fire point does not mean no firepoint, no matter how many times you repeat yourself.

What this post shows, actually, is that you haven't read my argument. It begins, yes, with noting that the mere inclusion of the word 'specific' does not imply that a fire point exists. It implies one of TWO things; EITHER a (non-specific) fire point exists, OR no fire point exists at ALL. Both readings are perfectly valid, taking the sentence in isolation. Having 'no specific destination' can, in fact, mean that you have no destination. If we stop here, no decision can be made.

However, the NEXT sentence clears it up quite nicely, because no fire point is NECESSARY. So we have to choose between interpreting the sentence above to imply a fire point, or not; but now we know that we don't NEED a fire point. Why, then, should we infer one? Particularly when we have to infer the existence of a 'fire point' that is in no way similar to ANY OTHER INSTANCE of the words 'fire point' in the ruleset? In order to even make this argument you have to present the idea of a 'general fire point', a concept which exists nowhere in the ruleset, and then assert that it is bound by SOME (but not all) of the rules that 'fire points' are bound by. In short, you have to attach a whole new sub-section of rules to 'fire points', and I don't see where you got permission to do that. Without that permission, you CAN'T; which leaves us with the assumption that since no fire point is mentioned, no fire point exists. And the game works just fine under that assumption.

In order to refute this argument, you need one of two things.

1. Proof that the inclusion of the word 'specific' automatically means that a fire point exists. You can't get this, because none exists. A negative statement about one thing does not imply a positive affirmation of the opposite, which is what you are asserting.

2. Evidence that without a fire point, the vehicle is non-functional; or, to rephrase, evidence that the Fire Point rules override the (more specific) rules for firing and drawing LOS from an open-topped transport. This would require rejecting the concept of specific > general, which would have many other, wide-ranging consequences in the ruleset.

If you can't do either of those things, then I'm afraid you don't have an argument.

Bottom end: A faq is given to restrict abilities through some transports. All other transports are unrestricted. It's as simple as that.

But it doesn't restrict specific transports.

nosferatu1001 wrote: No specific fire point does not mean no firepoint, no matter how many times you repeat yourself.

I agree.

In order for passengers to fire, the rules say they have to use a firepoint. Here is an excerpt from the rules.

FIRE POINTS
A transport vehicle may have a number of fire points
defined in its entry. A fire point is a hatch or gun slit
from which one or more passengers inside the vehicle
can fire (or use a psychic power).
Unless specified differently in the vehicle’s entry, a
single passenger may fire out of a fire point and the
other transported models may not fire. Ranges and line
of sight are measured from the fire point itself.

[emphasis added]

If the transport you are on says Fire points : None then no passengers could fire. Location of the fire points is also important, because all measuring for LOS and distance is done from that specific location. So, given that we acknowledge that the transport must have fire points to fire, we look at the open topped entry.

OPEN-TOPPED TRANSPORT VEHICLES
Open-topped vehicles do not have specific fire points.
Instead, all passengers in an open-topped vehicle may
fire, measuring range and line of sight from the hull of
the vehicle.

So we know that in order to fire, the transport must have fire points now we find that the Open-topped vehicle fire points are not specific locations on the vehicle, so we can measure from anywhere on the vehicle.

So, now we know that, unless specified differently in the codex, any open topped transport has fire points that can be fired out of, there are enough points on the vehicle that all passengers can fire from, and those fire points are anywhere on the vehicle hull.

Any questions?

I think this is a thread that's gone to simple restating of each camp's arguments. I think we all understand one side of this thinks Anrakyr can fire cause Open topped don't have Fire points,and the other side denies this as they read the sentence as making the entire hull available as a fire point. I don't think either side is going to convince the other. TOs will have to judge, until a FAQ update is made.

My vote? Doesn't work from a Transport of any sort.

Tye_Informer wrote:

I agree.

In order for passengers to fire, the rules say they have to use a firepoint. Here is an excerpt from the rules.

FIRE POINTS
A transport vehicle may have a number of fire points
defined in its entry. A fire point is a hatch or gun slit
from which one or more passengers inside the vehicle
can fire (or use a psychic power).
Unless specified differently in the vehicle’s entry, a
single passenger may fire out of a fire point and the
other transported models may not fire. Ranges and line
of sight are measured from the fire point itself.

[emphasis added]

If the transport you are on says Fire points : None then no passengers could fire. Location of the fire points is also important, because all measuring for LOS and distance is done from that specific location. So, given that we acknowledge that the transport must have fire points to fire, we look at the open topped entry.

OPEN-TOPPED TRANSPORT VEHICLES
Open-topped vehicles do not have specific fire points.
Instead, all passengers in an open-topped vehicle may
fire, measuring range and line of sight from the hull of
the vehicle.

So we know that in order to fire, the transport must have fire points now we find that the Open-topped vehicle fire points are not specific locations on the vehicle, so we can measure from anywhere on the vehicle.

So, now we know that, unless specified differently in the codex, any open topped transport has fire points that can be fired out of, there are enough points on the vehicle that all passengers can fire from, and those fire points are anywhere on the vehicle hull.

Any questions?

Sigh.

Read that quote from the Open-Topped rules again. It DIRECTLY CONTRADICTS the general rules for firing from a vehicle.

Now tell me which is more specific; Transports, or Open-Topped Transports?

Now tell me which rule takes precedence in a rules dispute; the more general rule, or the more specific rule?

Now put it all together, and tell me why an Open-Topped Transport requires a fire point. (Hint; it doesn't).

There is no reason to try and make those rules fit together. They contradict each other, and one of them overrides the other. That's how special rules work. There is no need for a fire point. If the transport had any fire points, then it would have a number of fire points listed. There are no exceptions for 'general' fire points, because 'general' fire points are a concept you are making up without any rules backing.

Let me try a different example.

I have a box, with the lid on. You can't see into it. You ask me, "Hey, what's in the box?"

I say, "This box does not have any apples inside."

Does this mean I have a piece of fruit in the box? NO. Believing that just because I specifically mentioned apples, I MUST have some kind of fruit in the box, is an unsupported assumption.

Similarly, believing that "no specific fire points" means that there exists some kind of fire point is an unsupported assumption.

Fair enough, however, there is no rule allowing you to do anything other than shooting, embarking and disembarking from an OT vehicle. Is MitM a shooting ability or Psychic power? If not it can't be used.

Happyjew wrote:Fair enough, however, there is no rule allowing you to do anything other than shooting, embarking and disembarking from an OT vehicle. Is MitM a shooting ability or Psychic power? If not it can't be used.

Except that page 70 allows embarked units to draw LOS from the vehicle. There is never anything specifically disallowing you from using a Psychic power or wargear from a transport; the issue, normally, is that you cannot draw LOS from the model because the model isn't on the table, so you have to use a fire point.

A psychic power or piece of wargear that requires LOS, however, can be used just fine from an open-topped transport, because you are told how to draw LOS for embarked models. All the rules work together just fine.

BeRzErKeR wrote:

Tye_Informer wrote:

I agree.

In order for passengers to fire, the rules say they have to use a firepoint. Here is an excerpt from the rules.

FIRE POINTS
A transport vehicle may have a number of fire points
defined in its entry. A fire point is a hatch or gun slit
from which one or more passengers inside the vehicle
can fire (or use a psychic power).
Unless specified differently in the vehicle’s entry, a
single passenger may fire out of a fire point and the
other transported models may not fire. Ranges and line
of sight are measured from the fire point itself.

[emphasis added]

If the transport you are on says Fire points : None then no passengers could fire. Location of the fire points is also important, because all measuring for LOS and distance is done from that specific location. So, given that we acknowledge that the transport must have fire points to fire, we look at the open topped entry.

OPEN-TOPPED TRANSPORT VEHICLES
Open-topped vehicles do not have specific fire points.
Instead, all passengers in an open-topped vehicle may
fire, measuring range and line of sight from the hull of
the vehicle.

So we know that in order to fire, the transport must have fire points now we find that the Open-topped vehicle fire points are not specific locations on the vehicle, so we can measure from anywhere on the vehicle.

So, now we know that, unless specified differently in the codex, any open topped transport has fire points that can be fired out of, there are enough points on the vehicle that all passengers can fire from, and those fire points are anywhere on the vehicle hull.

Any questions?

Sigh.

Read that quote from the Open-Topped rules again. It DIRECTLY CONTRADICTS the general rules for firing from a vehicle.

Now tell me which is more specific; Transports, or Open-Topped Transports?

Now tell me which rule takes precedence in a rules dispute; the more general rule, or the more specific rule?

Now put it all together, and tell me why an Open-Topped Transport requires a fire point. (Hint; it doesn't).

There is no reason to try and make those rules fit together. They contradict each other, and one of them overrides the other. That's how special rules work. There is no need for a fire point. If the transport had any fire points, then it would have a number of fire points listed. There are no exceptions for 'general' fire points, because 'general' fire points are a concept you are making up without any rules backing.

Let me try a different example.

I have a box, with the lid on. You can't see into it. You ask me, "Hey, what's in the box?"

I say, "This box does not have any apples inside."

Does this mean I have a piece of fruit in the box? NO. Believing that just because I specifically mentioned apples, I MUST have some kind of fruit in the box, is an unsupported assumption.

Similarly, believing that "no specific fire points" means that there exists some kind of fire point is an unsupported assumption.

You still on this? ok well like you've been saying if a open top does not need, have, nor use fire points, then any rules for fire points are irrelevant to open top transports right?
Because all models may shoot is more specific than a single passenger may shoot.

But lets get back on track.
pg 66, all transports have fire points.
pg 66 under fire points describe specific fire points where you draw line of site to the fire point
pg 70 OT transport still have fire points, its still bound by the rules under fire points. non specific fire points draws line of site to the hull. the point on the hull is your fire point, its just not a specified point.

sirlynchmob wrote:

You still on this? ok well like you've been saying if a open top does not need, have, nor use fire points, then any rules for fire points are irrelevant to open top transports right?
Because all models may shoot is more specific than a single passenger may shoot.

But lets get back on track.
pg 66, all transports have fire points.
pg 66 under fire points describe specific fire points where you draw line of site to the fire point
pg 70 OT transport still have fire points, its still bound by the rules under fire points except for those rules which are specifically contradicted by the rules on page 70, and thus overridden. non specific fire points are unnecessary, never mentioned anywhere, we have no permission to extrapolate their existence, and thus do not exist.

Fixed that for you, and bolded the corrections. You either aren't paying attention to what I've been saying, or you simply aren't understanding it. I'll try again.

The Land Raider has a Fire Points characteristic, right? It's a transport, it has to have a Fire Points characteristic. In fact, it's even written on the vehicle profile!

How many fire points does it have? Zero. It is a transport, and has NO FIRE POINTS. So the passengers can't shoot.

An Ork Trukk is a transport, so it has to have a Fire Points characteristic; page 66 tells us that all transports have this characteristic.

How many fire points does it have? ZERO. So the passengers can't shoot. . . Except they have this handy special rule, on page 70, which tells us they can shoot, and doesn't mention fire points at ALL except to deny that they exist.

BeRzErKeR wrote:

Happyjew wrote:Fair enough, however, there is no rule allowing you to do anything other than shooting, embarking and disembarking from an OT vehicle. Is MitM a shooting ability or Psychic power? If not it can't be used.

Except that page 70 allows embarked units to draw LOS from the vehicle. There is never anything specifically disallowing you from using a Psychic power or wargear from a transport; the issue, normally, is that you cannot draw LOS from the model because the model isn't on the table, so you have to use a fire point.

A psychic power or piece of wargear that requires LOS, however, can be used just fine from an open-topped transport, because you are told how to draw LOS for embarked models. All the rules work together just fine.

Let's see, the only thing on LOS I'm seeing is "Instead, all passengers in an open-topped vehicle may fire, measuring range and lie of sight from the hull of the vehicle." It's only talking about firing, nothing else.
Per the FAQ, non-PSA's can be used from a vehicle but they require you to use a fire point. Per your claim, you can't even use non-PSA psychic powers from an OT vehicle, because the FAQ specifies vehicles with Fire Points.

COpper - stop removing words like "specific" from your argument, or pretending someone is saying something theyre not. It renders it irrelevant and entirely ignorable.

Bezerker - 1 and 2 have already been covered.

Your attempts at claiming OT have no firepoints has no basis.

BeRzErKeR wrote:

sirlynchmob wrote:

You still on this? ok well like you've been saying if a open top does not need, have, nor use fire points, then any rules for fire points are irrelevant to open top transports right?
Because all models may shoot is more specific than a single passenger may shoot.

But lets get back on track.
pg 66, all transports have fire points.
pg 66 under fire points describe specific fire points where you draw line of site to the fire point
pg 70 OT transport still have fire points, its still bound by the rules under fire points except for those rules which are specifically contradicted by the rules on page 70, and thus overridden. non specific fire points are unnecessary, never mentioned anywhere, we have no permission to extrapolate their existence, and thus do not exist.

Fixed that for you, and bolded the corrections. You either aren't paying attention to what I've been saying, or you simply aren't understanding it. I'll try again.

The Land Raider has a Fire Points characteristic, right? It's a transport, it has to have a Fire Points characteristic. In fact, it's even written on the vehicle profile!

How many fire points does it have? Zero. It is a transport, and has NO FIRE POINTS. So the passengers can't shoot.

An Ork Trukk is a transport, so it has to have a Fire Points characteristic; page 66 tells us that all transports have this characteristic.

How many fire points does it have? ZERO. So the passengers can't shoot. . . Except they have this handy special rule, on page 70, which tells us they can shoot, and doesn't mention fire points at ALL except to deny that they exist.

thanks for clearing that up then, my orks will be happy to know they can go across the battlefield at 19" and still shoot.

Happyjew wrote:

Let's see, the only thing on LOS I'm seeing is "Instead, all passengers in an open-topped vehicle may fire, measuring range and lie of sight from the hull of the vehicle." It's only talking about firing, nothing else.
Per the FAQ, non-PSA's can be used from a vehicle but they require you to use a fire point. Per your claim, you can't even use non-PSA psychic powers from an OT vehicle, because the FAQ specifies vehicles with Fire Points.

The only rules for LOS in the GAME are associated with shooting. If you cannot use the Shooting rules to draw LOS, then you can never draw LOS for anything, ever, that is not firing a weapon.

Could you quote the FAQ question you're referring to? Because the one in the OP says nothing of the kind.

BGB FAQ, page 3:
Q: Can a model use a psychic power that is not a
Psychic Shooting Attack if it is embarked in a transport
vehicle? (p50)
A: Yes. If the power requires line of sight, this is still
worked out from the vehicle’s fire points (this will
count as one model shooting through that fire point if
the power is used in the Shooting phase).
If the psychic power does not require line of sight and
has a range or an area of effect that is normally
measured from the model using it, these are measured
from the vehicle’s hull, as explained in the Embarking
section on page 66.

nosferatu1001 wrote:COpper - stop removing words like "specific" from your argument, or pretending someone is saying something theyre not. It renders it irrelevant and entirely ignorable.

Bezerker - 1 and 2 have already been covered.

Your attempts at claiming OT have no firepoints has no basis.

They have? That's very interesting. So then, specific rules do NOT override general ones, and any negative statements automatically imply a positive statement about the opposite?

Congratulations on single-handedly overturning the entire paradigm on which logical argument is based. I commend you. . . I think. However, please provide some evidence of these claims; they're really quite extraordinary.

Ah, now youre leaping to unsupported conclusions.

Stop slippery sloping.

Happyjew wrote:BGB FAQ, page 3:
Q: Can a model use a psychic power that is not a
Psychic Shooting Attack if it is embarked in a transport
vehicle? (p50)
A: Yes. If the power requires line of sight, this is still
worked out from the vehicle’s fire points (this will
count as one model shooting through that fire point if
the power is used in the Shooting phase).
If the psychic power does not require line of sight and
has a range or an area of effect that is normally
measured from the model using it, these are measured
from the vehicle’s hull, as explained in the Embarking
section on page 66.

Thank you.

Please note that the answer says the power is still worked out through the vehicle's fire points, and that it counts as a model shooting from a fire point.

If my argument is correct, than this FAQ has no bearing on open-topped vehicles whatsoever; they have no fire points, do not shoot from fire points, and have a special rule that lets them do something else INSTEAD of firing through fire points. Page 70 tells us that if you would normally be required to measure from a fire point, you instead measure from anywhere on the hull. Therefore, you can use a Psychic power from an open-topped transport vehicle by measuring from anywhere on the hull.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

nosferatu1001 wrote:Ah, now youre leaping to unsupported conclusions.

Stop slippery sloping.

You just said that 1 and 2 had been answered; I assumed you were referring to my points 1 and 2 in my reply to you above. If not, please explain what you were actually referring to.

"something else INSTEAD of firing through fire points"

Except that isnt what the rules so, so you dont.

Except it is, and you do.

I've presented all my arguments. I've made counter-arguments to every objection I've seen, and NONE of them have been refuted. Just saying 'nuh-uh, nuh-uh, you can't do that' isn't an argument. Provide some actual, irrefutable evidence.

BeRzErKeR wrote:
Please note that the answer says the power is still worked out through the vehicle's fire points, and that it counts as a model shooting from a fire point if used during the shooting phase

Fixed that for you.

Happyjew wrote:

BeRzErKeR wrote:
Please note that the answer says the power is still worked out through the vehicle's fire points, and that it counts as a model shooting from a fire point if used during the shooting phase

Fixed that for you.

You're right, my mistake.

Once again, though, I have to point out that all the rules for LOS are associated with shooting. If we aren't allowed to use shooting rules to determine how to draw LOS for other things, then we can't ever use ANYTHING that requires LOS, but isn't actually shooting.

All that said, this might indeed make it illegal to use a psychic power that is not a PSA from an open-topped vehicle, except in the Shooting phase.

BeRzErKeR wrote:Except it is, and you do.

I've presented all my arguments. I've made counter-arguments to every objection I've seen, and NONE of them have been refuted. Just saying 'nuh-uh, nuh-uh, you can't do that' isn't an argument. Provide some actual, irrefutable evidence.

Apparently you have a differnet definition of "refute" to everyone else then; so far you havent actually refuted anything - just jumped to slippery slope conclusions and false dichotomies in the hope we wont notice.

Hasnt worked, btw. How about this - you can play it like that if you want, everyone else wont.

I've seen this posted on a few other forums, and it seems the general consensus agrees - open topped = fire points do exist and therefore it doesn't work.

I know we have two die hard sides to this argument, I truly wish it would work in the favor of open topped being able to use this ability still, but from the sheer number of people saying otherwise, I doubt you'd have much of a leg to stand on.

Conclusion: Discuss with YOUR gaming group vs the internet and people you will never meet or play against. Just expect to be shut down from a TO or the majority of your friends and don't turn into TFG at your club by not accepting the ruling of the majority.

I think this horse has been beaten enough...

Cryage wrote:I've seen this posted on a few other forums, and it seems the general consensus agrees - open topped = fire points do exist and therefore it doesn't work.

I know we have two die hard sides to this argument, I truly wish it would work in the favor of open topped being able to use this ability still, but from the sheer number of people saying otherwise, I doubt you'd have much of a leg to stand on.

I'm afraid that is an appeal to widespread belief, a fallacious argument in and of itself.
The many can easily be wrong.

I'm with zerker, the counter arguments I have read here have provided nothing to back up their claims.

In short:
"Have no specific fire points"

is not the same as

"Have some non-specific fire point"

More is needed to make that assertion but the remainder of the rules on p70 make it clear that you don't need more, they deal with the issue in an entirely different manner.

Cryage wrote:Conclusion: Discuss with YOUR gaming group vs the internet and people you will never meet or play against. Just expect to be shut down from a TO or the majority of your friends and don't turn into TFG at your club by not accepting the ruling of the majority.

I think this horse has been beaten enough...

I agree here, it seems no-one's going to change their minds now.