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.

It's only because some people don't understand that a example isn't a rule.

Or because some people don't understand that not getting a bonus isn't a penalty. But this probably isn't going anywhere so I give up

Jidmah wrote:
RPJ does not give permission to count as moving 12" for anything but penalties. Not being able to shoot is a penalty, thus you can count as moving 12" for the purpose of ignoring that penalty. Getting a cover save is not a penalty. If you try to count as moving 12" for not getting a cover save, your breaking the rules. You do not have permission to count as moving 12" for a benefit.

If you pick either cruising speed or flat-out for all purposes you are violating the rules. You are not allowed to do so.

You never shoot and take saves at the same time, so you would never count as going flat out an cruising speed at the same time anyways.

@Lone Dragon
RPJ explicitly ignores the limitations for moving that extra inch. If that extra inch makes you reach flat-out speed you ignore any penalties that come with it. "may fire no weapons" is a penalty.

In addition, flat-out doesn't require you to fire no weapons, it represents that. You aren't required to move at top speed (i.e. you full maximum movement distance) either.

Please site on what page in the rule book that not being able to shoot is defined as a penalty. Until a "penalty" is defined in the rule book, we cant just ignore rules cause we feel they are penalties.

If I go 13" and hit difficult terrain with that last inch, does that mean I don’t need to roll a difficult terrain check since I ignore penalties ?

BRB says if you move flat out you may not shoot. Pretty clear rule.

Jidmah wrote:@Lone Dragon
RPJ explicitly ignores the limitations for moving that extra inch. If that extra inch makes you reach flat-out speed you ignore any penalties that come with it. "may fire no weapons" is a penalty.

In addition, flat-out doesn't require you to fire no weapons, it represents that. You aren't required to move at top speed (i.e. you full maximum movement distance) either.

And here's the other point of contention. Show me a scrap of proof that not firing the weapons is a "penalty." The problem with that argument is that the RPJ is trying to take an overly broad veiw of what is and isn't a penalty. Nothing requires you to move the top speed, but the rule I posted (Fast vehicles moving flat out may fire no weapons. if you missed it) prevents a vehicle that fired from claiming a flat out cover save. Firing weapons doesn't seem like a penalty of moving flat out, it seems like a prerequisite to it. Did you move over 12" inches? In the case of the planes, yes. Did you fire? Here's the kicker, if you answer yes, you prevent yourself from gaining the flat out obscured bonus because moving flat out prevents you from firing.

The other thing your side of the argument is missing is, you trying to say the vehicle can be in two movement speeds at once. The other part is this, take a look at the aerial assault rule- If this model moved at cruising speed, it can fire all its weapons. The book itself tells us that flat out is a third level of speed, which is defined by moving over the distance of cruising speed and that it is a separate level of speed. What that means is that you have to be moving flat out to get the cover save (Skimmer rules say you have to move flat out, which flat out says no shooting), because if you moved flat out (Just by moving 13" you claim flat out is you're argument), you broke the rules. Which rule? Aerial assault, since (if you try to claim the obscured save, which you only get with flat out movement) you did not move cruising speed aerial assault itself does not kick in. It's a choice, you can move 13" and count as moving 12 then shoot without a cover save, or you can move 13" and chose the flat out set.

A penalty is a consequence or disadvantage attached to any action, condition, etc.
Can you really type that because it's not in the BRB as something that the english definition is wrong?

By that reasoning I think that the "emperor" means pie because it's not stated otherwise in the BRB.
Use your common sense, they meant it by the definition in the english dictonary.

KrimsunBaron wrote:A penalty is a consequence or disadvantage attached to any action, condition, etc.
Can you really type that because it's not in the BRB as something that the english definition is wrong?

By that reasoning I think that the "emperor" means pie because it's not stated otherwise in the BRB.
Use your common sense, they meant it by the definition in the english dictonary.

Actually penalty is quite well defined in several portions of the BRB, to list a few; page 36 under assault grenades, and the last paragraph of assaulting through cover, page 39 under check morale, page 42 under Two different special weapons (there are more, this is just to get the point across). Notice they specifically come out and say penalty? That means you can see it is quite well defined what is a penalty and what is not. The not firing when moving flat out is not defined as a penalty in the terms of the rules, because it does not tell us it's a penalty.

By you saying to use the English definition there are a whole slew of problems that will arise. To give an example, Is a chainsword a power weapon? By the rules no, by English dictionary definition yes. The way you come to this conclusion is by first deriving that chainsword is a portmanteau of chainsaw and sword. A chain saw is a self powered item, which means a chainsword is a self powered sword, so if I have a powered sword I must have a power sword. If we look at the rules a chainsword is just a normal close combat weapon, not a power weapon as by the book power weapons have a "disruptive energy field" which the chainsword does not have. You can see we can't use the "English definition" of words in the game, as it can lead to so many mistakes.

Lone Dragoon wrote:
Actually penalty is quite well defined in several portions of the BRB, to list a few; page 36 under assault grenades, and the last paragraph of assaulting through cover, page 39 under check morale, page 42 under Two different special weapons (there are more, this is just to get the point across). Notice they specifically come out and say penalty? That means you can see it is quite well defined what is a penalty and what is not. The not firing when moving flat out is not defined as a penalty in the terms of the rules, because it does not tell us it's a penalty.

By you saying to use the English definition there are a whole slew of problems that will arise. To give an example, Is a chainsword a power weapon? By the rules no, by English dictionary definition yes. The way you come to this conclusion is by first deriving that chainsword is a portmanteau of chainsaw and sword. A chain saw is a self powered item, which means a chainsword is a self powered sword, so if I have a powered sword I must have a power sword. If we look at the rules a chainsword is just a normal close combat weapon, not a power weapon as by the book power weapons have a "disruptive energy field" which the chainsword does not have. You can see we can't use the "English definition" of words in the game, as it can lead to so many mistakes.

Thank you,
I am at work so I dont have my rulebook handy to qoute the pages as you did.

Just out of curiosity, If I move my jet (whichever one we are arguing about) with RPJ, 13" and end the move in difficult terrain, and fail the test, what happens?

So, essentially what you're arguing LD, is that RPJ does nothing? None of the word "penalty" I could find we're associated with vehicles.
Since RPJ is only an option for vehicles, you're saying it does nothing. If there's two ways of looking at a rule, and one way makes the rule do nothing, that way of interpretation is inherently flawed and should not be considered.

rigeld2 wrote:So, essentially what you're arguing LD, is that RPJ does nothing? None of the word "penalty" I could find we're associated with vehicles.
Since RPJ is only an option for vehicles, you're saying it does nothing. If there's two ways of looking at a rule, and one way makes the rule do nothing, that way of interpretation is inherently flawed and should not be considered.

No, I believe you have your choice. Move 13" and shoot, but you don't get the obscured save as you didn't move flat out. Or move 13" and claim the cover save since you didn't shoot and are eligible for flat out. On a vehicle such as a Trukk, you can move 13" and disembark as if you were moving cruising speed. It has NEVER been played that trukks moving 13" count as moving flat out unless the person makes that announcement, as the flat out prevents disembarking. I don't see how the sudden addition of a new vehicle would change that.

As for the penalty, that was to show that they do clearly spell out if something is considered a penalty or if it is not. The word penalty does not appear at all on pages 70 or 71 when they are referencing flat out movement.

Happyjew wrote:Just out of curiosity, If I move my jet (whichever one we are arguing about) with RPJ, 13" and end the move in difficult terrain, and fail the test, what happens?

That depends on if you were making the choice to move flat out or at combat speed to allow you to shoot. If you were going flat out, it's immobilized and destroyed. If you chose cruising speed it is simply immobilized at the end of its movement.

Lone Dragoon wrote:It has NEVER been played that trukks moving 13" count as moving flat out unless the person makes that announcement, as the flat out prevents disembarking. I don't see how the sudden addition of a new vehicle would change that.

Because trucks don't gain anything by going flat out, so it was an irrelevant argument.

And where's your support for a choice? There's no penalty involved with going flat out, so what does RPJ actually allow you to ignore?

As for the penalty, that was to show that they do clearly spell out if something is considered a penalty or if it is not. The word penalty does not appear at all on pages 70 or 71 when they are referencing flat out movement.

That's pretty much exactly my point, yes. Thanks for confirming I didn't miss anything.

Happyjew wrote:Just out of curiosity, If I move my jet (whichever one we are arguing about) with RPJ, 13" and end the move in difficult terrain, and fail the test, what happens?

That depends on if you were making the choice to move flat out or at combat speed to allow you to shoot. If you were going flat out, it's immobilized and destroyed. If you chose cruising speed it is simply immobilized at the end of its movement.

What rules support do you have for making the choice? When is it made? Where's your support for Flat Out having to be stated during movement?

You're making far more assumptions than your opponents IMO.

rigeld2 wrote:

Lone Dragoon wrote:It has NEVER been played that trukks moving 13" count as moving flat out unless the person makes that announcement, as the flat out prevents disembarking. I don't see how the sudden addition of a new vehicle would change that.

Because trucks don't gain anything by going flat out, so it was an irrelevant argument.

And where's your support for a choice? There's no penalty involved with going flat out, so what does RPJ actually allow you to ignore?

No, trukks do not gain anything for having moved flat out, however the ork players never looked a gift horse in the mouth. For all those years that someone moved 13" with a trukk, and disembarked we had no problem believing it was cruising speed. Now however you want to claim you can be both cruising speed and flat out? Show some proof that you can be flat out (Which is a very specific definition, as if you move flat out you may not shoot) and cruising speed at the same time.

rigeld2 wrote:That's pretty much exactly my point, yes. Thanks for confirming I didn't miss anything.

You didn't miss anything, but the fact that there is no penalty mentioned on pages 70 and 71 hurts your argument for RPJ. Why? RPJ allows you to ignore a penalty, but as there is no specific mention that being unable to shoot is a penalty, you are not able to ignore that clause of flat out. I've pointed out that they specifically tell you if something is a penalty, and if you move flat out you may not shoot is not a penalty since they don't tell us it is.

rigeld2 wrote:What rules support do you have for making the choice? When is it made? Where's your support for Flat Out having to be stated during movement?

What rule allows you to claim flat out while shooting? RPJ doesn't, it allows you to ignore penalties associated with moving that distance. Is being unable to shoot a penalty? I've showed it's not a penalty, so that it cannot be ignored. As for answering your questions I'll answer with a situation and with another question. You plan on moving a fast skimmer 24" out of a piece of terrain, the vehicle has not yet moved, but the immobilized result of a dangerous terrain test causes the vehicle to be wrecked and the passengers to be unable to disembark. Why does this happen? The vehicle has not moved, but intends to move flat out and is forced to take the dangerous test, and all passengers are killed because you planned to move flat out. In reality you moved 0" but because you announced or intended to move flat out, you had to suffer the consequences. This is the same situation, if you announce that you are moving flat out you suffer the consequences, being unable to shoot.

So RPJ does nothing? Since here are no penalties associated with movement...
There's no choice - if you move 13" you're moving flat out. RPJ doesn't give you that choice
The only thing RPJ would do, ever, is add 1 to your max move.
Using your interpretation that is.

As far as the immobilized/wreck - is that in an FAQ? I can check later but I'm not 100% sure that's right. I could be wrong though.

Happyjew wrote:Just out of curiosity, If I move my jet (whichever one we are arguing about) with RPJ, 13" and end the move in difficult terrain, and fail the test, what happens?

With any flyer (or skimmer) you can choose to hover over the terrain. Doing so means you can never claim a cover save from the cover. So if I was a flyer I would never enter land in terrain.

Skimmers that start or end their move in difficult terrain count it as dangerous terrain.

rigeld2 wrote:So RPJ does nothing? Since here are no penalties associated with movement...
There's no choice - if you move 13" you're moving flat out. RPJ doesn't give you that choice
The only thing RPJ would do, ever, is add 1 to your max move.
Using your interpretation that is.

As far as the immobilized/wreck - is that in an FAQ? I can check later but I'm not 100% sure that's right. I could be wrong though.

Red paint job allows you to move 7" and treat it as combat speed, 13" and count it as cruising speed, but if you choose to fire at that cruising speed you do not gain the cover save since you did not follow the rules to gain flat out. As far as the immobilized/wreck part here's the relevant FAQ.

Q: If a skimmer is immobilised in its own Movement phase whilst moving flat out is it still destroyed? (p71)
A: Yes

Since it says while moving flat out, which starting in terrain triggers it, that leans heavily (though not entirely conclusively) towards announcing movement speed. Otherwise if a player had intended to move flat out, measured to move flat out, then rolled the dangerous terrain test, they could argue since they hadn't moved that the flat out hadn't happened. However it is destroyed in the process of moving flat out, and still counts as destroyed. Like I said, it's not by any means conclusive, but to me it does indicate the player says something about their movement speed since a skimmer ignores difficult terrain it doesn't begin or end in, how else could it be immobilized "whilst moving flat out?"

Happyjew wrote:Skimmers that start or end their move in difficult terrain count it as dangerous terrain.

Oddly enough I can't find where they can hover any more. I might be thinking of 4th. You are correct.

I know some flyers can hover, but that is Apocalypse.

Iguess the statement on page 70 of the BRB is too vague. The one that says a fast vehicle moving flat out may not fire any weapons?

Remember, if it seems like cheese, it probably is. Choose offense or defense.

So, that would be the penalty that RPJ ignores then.

Oddly enough thats the point f the rule. Lets them move 7" and still shoot out, but are hit on 6s. Why this is a revelation to some after 4 years of 5th ed is a bit of a shock...

But red paint job wouldn't have any effect on moving flat out, as the penalty is part of the movement type, not as a result of the extra inch. The main misinterpretation is that a dakkajet, etc. can be cruising at flat out speed. It may not. It has to be one or the other.

No, that is your misconception not based in the rules

It ignores the extra inch *for any penalties* associated with the extra inch

Not being able to fire - is a penalty
Getting a 4+ cover save - is not a penalty

Nos, you missed the point again...

RPJ states that the extra inch of movement does not incur a penalty, therefore extending the cruising speed limit by one inch. So you can cruise and fire up to 13". The penalty for moving flat out is not triggered by the RPJ, therefore preventing any weapons fire. There is no grey zone of a flat out cruising speed at ~13", it is one or the other.

Again, its alk about which choice you choose to make. Nothing can claim a flat out cover save and fire its weapons. Be a big boy and choose a role.

No, you keep missing the point. Entirely

You HAVE moved 13", and have therefore moved flat out. Straight from basic rules there

Then RPJ kicks in and says you ignore any PENALTIES from moving this extra inch - so as far as PENALTIES go you have moved 12", meaning you can fire

As far as "nothign" I guess you havent met SR then? Oh, and "be a big boy" and reread the rules, and note where you keep on going wrong. You have this misconception about how RPJ works, and keep repeating it as if it were real.

nosferatu1001 wrote:No, you keep missing the point. Entirely

You HAVE moved 13", and have therefore moved flat out. Straight from basic rules there

Then RPJ kicks in and says you ignore any PENALTIES from moving this extra inch - so as far as PENALTIES go you have moved 12", meaning you can fire

As far as "nothign" I guess you havent met SR then? Oh, and "be a big boy" and reread the rules, and note where you keep on going wrong. You have this misconception about how RPJ works, and keep repeating it as if it were real.

Point out where in the book that it considers the, "may not fire weapons" clause is a penalty and you might have a point. I pointed out numerous places in the book that specifically says something is a penalty, and I can go on to list several others. If you can prove that the may not fire is a penalty, people on this side of the argument would concede the point. The problem is the book is specific about what is and is not a penalty, and there is nothing to indicate the may not fire clause is a penalty.

The way I still see it is you can only move flat out if you didn't fire any guns. Might be a moot point though soon with 6th so let's hope we'll get our answer soon

Lone Dragoon wrote:

nosferatu1001 wrote:No, you keep missing the point. Entirely

You HAVE moved 13", and have therefore moved flat out. Straight from basic rules there

Then RPJ kicks in and says you ignore any PENALTIES from moving this extra inch - so as far as PENALTIES go you have moved 12", meaning you can fire

As far as "nothign" I guess you havent met SR then? Oh, and "be a big boy" and reread the rules, and note where you keep on going wrong. You have this misconception about how RPJ works, and keep repeating it as if it were real.

Point out where in the book that it considers the, "may not fire weapons" clause is a penalty and you might have a point. I pointed out numerous places in the book that specifically says something is a penalty, and I can go on to list several others. If you can prove that the may not fire is a penalty, people on this side of the argument would concede the point. The problem is the book is specific about what is and is not a penalty, and there is nothing to indicate the may not fire clause is a penalty.

Again, English. Not difficult.

Is something of detriment to you? Then it is a penalty. Difficult terrain tests causing your I to drop to 1 in asault is a penalty. Not being able to fire is a penalty

If you disagree, find me a definition in the rulebook for "the". If you cannot do so, your argument is moot

Lone Dragoon wrote:Point out where in the book that it considers the, "may not fire weapons" clause is a penalty and you might have a point. I pointed out numerous places in the book that specifically says something is a penalty, and I can go on to list several others. If you can prove that the may not fire is a penalty, people on this side of the argument would concede the point. The problem is the book is specific about what is and is not a penalty, and there is nothing to indicate the may not fire clause is a penalty.

So, to answer your question with a question:

Point out where in the book the term "ork" is defined. You won't find it, thus all the rules referring to "orks" must be broken, right?

WH40k is not a well-defined rules set(as per the definition of well-defined), so the stating that a list of anything labeled a penalty is a complete list of penalties is wrong. Just like you still know what an ork or a tyranid is without it being defined for every single unit.

A penalty is a negative effect that one suffers resulting out of it's own actions. Pick any random dictionary and find penalty. Not being able to shoot for moving too fast will fit all those definitions.
If you disagree, please tell us what "Not being able to shoot because of moving too fast" is, if not a penalty. Something, that's not a washed-down definition for penalties.

This is exactly the same argument as people claiming that "injuries" aren't wounds, thus breaking the FNP rule. WH40k requires you to take the common meaning of non-defined words to work at all. And defined means an explanation of what the word means, not some random appearances in differing contexts. Because not one of the rules you referred to actual tell you what a penalty is.

His point is that penalty is used often in the rules, and is therefore defined in the rules - using the english definition for a 40k defined word is a nono.

Even if it's a penalty the rulebook says a vehicle moving flat-out may not fire any weapons. So be definition if you fire a weapon you can't be moving flat-out