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.

Someone has a sig about thanking Twilight fans for making us 40kers look ... well, better.

But 5 pages of nerd rage on this? Shock-prows/dozer blades & Straw Man Fallacies.

"Well, since you can't find the rule, you're wrong!"
"No, since *you* can't find a citation, you're wrong!"

Really guys? This is a set-back, even for YMDC.

It's time to end this. Kinda like when the Incredible Hulk's buddy Rick Jones busted up a row between him and Wolverine (Hulk #340, 20 years back, with a good/famous cover with the Hulk reflecting in Logan's claws). Rick asks, "Don't you have something better to do?"

Wolverine admitted, that yeah, he did.

-- Oh, nuts. I'm trying to end a nerd argument, by referencing an old comic book, with Wolverine no less.

Jidmah wrote:It is fully possible that "Banners and other decorative items" is one item of a four-item list, as antennas, dozer blades and gun barrels are obviously not decorative.

Hmm, that could be grammatically right. If it was "dozer blades, guns, antennas, banners, and other decorative items" it lumps them all into the 'decorative items category. Seeing as how it doesn't have that comma there, it is possible it is a 4 item list, with the 4th item being a category. But then there would need to be another 'and' before banners.

On the other hand, GW has horrible grammatical skills and often butchers the English language. I think that's funny for an English company of nerds

-cgmckenzie

Theyre nerds, but not about the English language

Well, for the record, at least according to current U.S. collegiate writing standards, the last comma is no longer used.

What used to be the proper way of writing lists, ie: "Trains, planes, and automobiles" is now properly written as "Trains, planes and automobiles".

It really made me mad that I had to learn the new way of using commas when working on a Master's degree....lol.

The good news is that we have succesfully turned a pathetic thread about a rule on which individual groups and TO's will ultimately rule, into a more pathetic thread about the proprer use of commas!

Wait, when did this happen!? I always wrote it with the comma, and NOW people are telling me it isn't needed?

Something about that doesn't seem right.

-cgmckenzie

And US standards apply to the UK how?

nosferatu1001 wrote:Jidmah - the conjunction with "other" indicates that "and other decorative items" includes the preceding items. Otherwise it isnt anywhere close to being correct English

"Ignore ((gun barrels, dozer blades, antennas, banners) and other decorative items)."

"Ignore (gun barrels, dozer blades, antennas, (banners and other decorative items))."

Given that at least gun barrels are not decorative, but have a function rules-wise, I think it can be read both ways. Doesn't really do anything to the rules though.

nosferatu1001 wrote:And I have done so. Notice how since the third time the rules were pointed out to you that you are now ignoring the rules, and our requests for YOU to provide some rules to back up your assertion that an optional, paid for upgrade is somehow essential hull?

Just like to point out, that Night's Blood has said at least twice in this thread that he was questioning whether the regular prow counts as the hull or not. That is not an optional upgrade.

If it is counted as part of the hull, then taking the option of a Shock Prow actually reduces the size of the hull - something I didn't really think was possible.

If I don't take the sponsons on my shadowsword, I reduce the size of the hull. Mind you, I also get 14 armor on the sides, but the hull size is reduced.

-cgmckenzie

Replacing turret-mounted weapons with hull- or pintle-mounted weapons also reduced hull.

Reviewing the Games Workshop Assembly Guide for the Raider (online version that is the same as the one that comes with the Raider itself)

http://www.games-workshop.com/gws/content/article.jsp?categoryId=&pIndex=1&aId=12400031a&multiPageMode=true&start=2

Stage 11: "The kit comes with a choice of two prow designs, so simply decide which one you'd like on the Raider."

Stage 12: "Slot the prow into the hole at the front of the kit."

Stage 27: "With all the necessary parts assembled, what follows is all about personalising your Raider. The kit comes with a large range of extra components that can adorn the hull and deck to your liking. We began customising it by placing the three smaller blades in the depressions under the air intake."

These include

Spikes: Stage 28
Chain Snares: Stage 29
Banners: Stage 30
Splinter Rifles: Stage 31
More Spikes: Stage 32

I would submit that all of the above items (Spikes, Chain Snares, Banners, Splinter Rifles, More Spikes) are items that are "purly decorative"

Everyone in my area also plays that the Prow and Shock Prow is part of the hull, f.y.i. I have never had a person tell me that it wasn't part of the hull. I also allow people to shoot the front as well.

The argument that the orignal prow on the vehicle is not hull strikes me as disengenuous. I might as well take the position that any part of any vehicle is 'just for decoration' and not a part of the vehicle hull at all. This is a similar arument to people that claim that the Stormraven/Vendetta/Razorwing's "wings" are purely for decoration and not part of the hull, and therefore you can't measure distance to it. Put your model together, when you are finished putting the base model together (minus, purity seals, banner polls, spikes, heads, skulls (x20)) you have the hull of your vehicle. Everything after that is purely decorative.

In regards to the Shock Prow specifically. I would also state that the fundamental difference between a Shock Prow and Dozer Blade etc... is that the Dozer Blade is an addition to the model itself. It does not replace anything on the model but adds to the model itself. A rhino without a dozer blade is a complete model that may be fielded. A Dark Eldar model without a prow is not finished and model and cannot be fielded. A Shock Prow is a replacement to the model itself and therefore replaces the hull with another hull piece, changing the deminsions of the hull.



IMHO

Except for the last paragraph I would agree. But that last paragraph fails for Ork reinforced rams, which are also not part of the hull, but part of the base model, and leave an ugly front when removed. GW still ignores it when measuring, as seen on page 3.

well for the purposes of ramming a vehicle when the vehicle comes into contact with the vehicle it is ramming it will stop. For purposes of seeing the shock prow for LOS it wouldn't count due to the fact that it is a comparative element to a dozer blade or a weapon (Basilisk gun barrel etc.) which dont count for purposes of LOS as stated in the Rules. Why there is a serious argument on this is beyond me.

cgmckenzie wrote:If I don't take the sponsons on my shadowsword, I reduce the size of the hull. Mind you, I also get 14 armor on the sides, but the hull size is reduced.

-cgmckenzie

Forgive me, I don't know anything about Apocalypse - do you pay points to "upgrade" your Shadowsword to have no sponsons?

I was merely enlightening nos another part of the debate. He was talking about an upgradable part of the model, while the poster he was replying to was more concerned about the original part.

No, it is a free upgrade to AV 14 on the sides. Standard is sponsons with TL HB or TL HF and a lascannon, upgraded is without sponsons.

-cgmckenzie

Someran - I was aware he was trying to drag it away from the topic, but I was trying to actually get them to admit they have zero rules backing for their position. Absolutely none.

Once you determine the shock prow isnt hull, a logical extension would be that the prow isnt - but that wasnt the question. Once you resolve the status of the shock prow (not hull) you can then resolve other items.

There is no real rules base for the regular prow not being hull. It's really nothing different than the two front parts of a serpent or a "nose" on many other xenos vehicles.

Yet if you determine that one similar item is decorative and not-hull, then the other item should ideally be decorative for consistency.

Certainly when you look at the model it does not appear to be part of the contguous hull section, but stuck out by itself.

The shock prow is only not hull because its functionality as vehicle upgrade, like dozer blades or reinforced rams. Just looking at my avatar, I can find dozens of pieces which are less hull than the regular prow by that definition, the most striking one probably being the wheels, but also the pieces of metal the 'ard case sits on and the boards beneath the doors.

The shockprow/prow is part of the continuous under body of the vessel. If you look at it, it has the same ribbing is the under body. Not sure if it matters here, but my local GW store manager, and event coordinator, also agrees that the shock prow is hull because the essence of the rule about decorative items is to aid against people attempting to draw LoS to silly things like "Oh, look, I can see your banner pole through this window, so I can shoot your vehicle." However, after explaining the argument, he did state that you should always ask the event coordinators before a tournament to find out how they may be running prows. Apparently, the question caught him off guard because no one has ever asked him about it or taken the prow for anything but hull. From what it looks like, you, those in the "not hull" camp, are trying to say that the shockprow, and hell, by extension, the normal prow, is a weapon, which it is not, or a dozer, banner, etc, etc, which it is also not. All references to a LRBT and its cannon are useless and pointless. Because a shockprow/normal prow is not a gun. I also can't see how it's lumped into the category of decorative items. It certainly is not a dozer blade. It's not added on. With a dozer blade, you attach it to your existing model. You don't add anything to your model when you use a shockprow. It just takes the normal prows place. The prow, either one, must be included on the vehicle per construction. I know you'll say "but my tank is required to put weapons in the holes. . ." yes, clearly, you must, but as already stated, the prow, either one, is not a weapon so that argument is pointless. Reading what a dozer blade does, and then reading what a shockprow does, you'll find they have nothing in common what so ever. I don't see it as being close enough to draw enough weight to lump it into decorative. It's certainly not a banner pole, or a random spiky bit, it is definitely not a gun, hence I don't see it going into the decorative category. It's also a very large piece of the model in width, height, and depth. "But my cannon is really big on my tank. . ." yeah, clearly, but again, a shockprow/prow is not a weapon, so that has no bearing. Just a few thoughts to stir the pot.

Again, everything you just said applies just as well to the trukk's reinforced ram. And the picture on pg. 3 of the BRB shows GW ignoring the exact same ram.

But, that's an ork trukk, not dark eldar raider. Further, I believe there's space between the ram and trukk. There's no space between the prow and midsection of a raider, it's one continuous piece. I would say this argument doesn't apply.

Oh, there isn't a space. It's firmly attached to the exact same part as the motor, the grill and the front wheels, With one piece even securing it from below(those three spikey things). That's about as much connection to the trukk as that prow, if not even more.

"that's an ork trukk, not dark eldar raid" is a great argument, really. If you use that, your army may never assault, shoot or move. There are no pictures of dark eldar in the BRB, just orks, marines, imperial tanks and a few tyranids.
Reinforced rams and shock prows are functionally and model-wise almost identical, so no reason to treat them any different.

This is not a fun merry-go-round...

I really don't see the problem at all. A regular prow is hull, any vehicle upgrade isn't, even if it looks almost the same as the regular thing. Funky models get funky rules, a battlewagon, for example allows you to disembark into the second level of a ruin, if you use the big shoota turret on top of the (kill)kannon turret. And let's not talk about valkyries and stormravens. Abstract rules do abstract stuff.

I just don't see it that way. Perhaps, gw will FAQ it once and for all. Using your same argument about vehicle upgrades = no hull; what about a vehicle with extra armor? If it has this upgrade does the entire vehicle become not hull? Your point doesn't work very well IMO. So it's either both prows are hull or neither IMO. Physically there's almost no difference between the two, just rules that separates them.

Only the wysiwyg upgrade to your vehicle "extra armour" (see forgeworld for EA kits) is the non-hull bit.

And this is because one could stick a piece of paper on it with 'extra armour' written on it and have satisfied the 'visually represented' demand.

So, you're saying that either I have to buy forge world direct product to properly represent extra armor, and I've seen them, they cover quite a bit of the model in question, namely rhinos, or it doesnt count? Hmmmm. . .I don't think so. "Look! I've covered my entire model with "Extra Armor"! Oh, you can't see hull for targeting purposes? Guess you can't shoot at it." Just doesn't work in my mind. And is, frankly, dumb, if that's the case.

No - did I say that?

I said it must be visually represented, and gave an *example* of FW items that show how it must be visually represented.