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.

nosferatu1001 wrote:No, it means when they shoot.

You still have no rule that makes you turn them to face the monolith. Shocking that youre lacking rules, truly shocking.

No your wrong. It doesn't say when they are shooting. It states " Infantry models can also be turned to face their targets in the shooting phase.

It doesn't say when you are shooting at a unit. You just turn to face your target. You monolith makes you target it for the purposes of LoS. This makes them turn.

Who's lacking on their rules now Nosferatu1001?

Happyjew wrote:helixthief, have you ever played against writhguards/wraithlords? They don't even have eyes.So are you going to tell me they can never shoot?

Read the thread.

Happyjew wrote:helixthief, have you ever played against writhguards/wraithlords? They don't even have eyes.So are you going to tell me they can never shoot?

they do have eyes under their helmets.

bladedragon03 wrote:

nosferatu1001 wrote:No, it means when they shoot.

You still have no rule that makes you turn them to face the monolith. Shocking that youre lacking rules, truly shocking.

No your wrong. It doesn't say when they are shooting. It states " Infantry models can also be turned to face their targets in the shooting phase.

It doesn't say when you are shooting at a unit. You just turn to face your target. You monolith makes you target it for the purposes of LoS. This makes them turn.

Who's lacking on their rules now Nosferatu1001?

Wait - seriously?

Cite the rule that says the Monolith makes itself your target.

And as far as blind models - yes, RAW they are not allowed to fire. That's one thing that everyone agrees and "house rules".

bladedragon03 wrote:

nosferatu1001 wrote:No, it means when they shoot.

You still have no rule that makes you turn them to face the monolith. Shocking that youre lacking rules, truly shocking.

No your wrong. It doesn't say when they are shooting. It states " Infantry models can also be turned to face their targets in the shooting phase.

It doesn't say when you are shooting at a unit. You just turn to face your target. You monolith makes you target it for the purposes of LoS. This makes them turn.

Who's lacking on their rules now Nosferatu1001?

The monolith doesnt make a unit target it. That will just make this debate more confusing.

LoS as defined on BRB is from the model firing to the target model. That means it takes into account that the model will move,turn etc in order to see its target. If you want to be too strict about LoS then treat the model tracing LoS as a firing model and have it turn towards the target.

rigeld2 wrote:

bladedragon03 wrote:

nosferatu1001 wrote:No, it means when they shoot.

You still have no rule that makes you turn them to face the monolith. Shocking that youre lacking rules, truly shocking.

No your wrong. It doesn't say when they are shooting. It states " Infantry models can also be turned to face their targets in the shooting phase.

It doesn't say when you are shooting at a unit. You just turn to face your target. You monolith makes you target it for the purposes of LoS. This makes them turn.

Who's lacking on their rules now Nosferatu1001?

Wait - seriously?

Cite the rule that says the Monolith makes itself your target.

And as far as blind models - yes, RAW they are not allowed to fire. That's one thing that everyone agrees and "house rules".

You draw LoS from one model to another model. The fact is it can still rotate to see the monolith if it's back is turned because in the shooting phase a model can turn to face whatever it's drawing LoS to.

copper.talos wrote:LoS as defined on BRB is from the model firing to the target model. That means it takes into account that the model will move,turn etc in order to see its target. If you want to be too strict about LoS then treat the model tracing LoS as a firing model and have it turn towards the target.

Yes everyone except one person in the world understands this.

And I feel he my be beyond reach.

There is no shame in admitting you had a rule wrong, it is a bigger shame to stand by that rule, when proven wrong, and look like a fool.

Happyjew wrote:helixthief, have you ever played against writhguards/wraithlords? They don't even have eyes.So are you going to tell me they can never shoot?

helixthief is opposing that viewpoint in this thread.

nosferatu1001 is championing it.

You can turn - IE you have the option. I opt not to face the Monolith. What's forcing me to do so?

Blade - "You monolith makes you target it for the purposes of LoS"

NO IT DOES NOT

There are no rules anywhere that state this, you are simply making it up.

Helix - please, find some actual rules to back up your entirely rules lacking argument. Actual quotes would do, just anything, You have been entirley lacking so far.

rigeld2 wrote:You can turn - IE you have the option. I opt not to face the Monolith. What's forcing me to do so?

Well that is kinda the point.

Im claiming you do not need to face it to have LOS (for it to be effective)

helixthief wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:You can turn - IE you have the option. I opt not to face the Monolith. What's forcing me to do so?

Well that is kinda the point.

Im claiming you do not need to face it to have LOS (for it to be effective)

So can you cite where infantry get a 360 LoS?

nosferatu1001 wrote:Blade - "You monolith makes you target it for the purposes of LoS"

NO IT DOES NOT

There are no rules anywhere that state this, you are simply making it up.

Helix - please, find some actual rules to back up your entirely rules lacking argument. Actual quotes would do, just anything, You have been entirley lacking so far.

OK, which part did you not understand.

Im not being funny, but do you own the rulebook?

Also, if you answer my nid question it will help me see where the flaw in your logic is and make presenting the facts more easier...this is only to help you.

nosferatu1001 wrote:Blade - "You monolith makes you target it for the purposes of LoS"

NO IT DOES NOT

There are no rules anywhere that state this, you are simply making it up.

Helix - please, find some actual rules to back up your entirely rules lacking argument. Actual quotes would do, just anything, You have been entirley lacking so far.

Yes it doesn't make you target it. I was wrong. Target or not LoS model to model you aren't missing that within 6" unless there's a wall or other impassable ter.

rigeld2 wrote:

helixthief wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:You can turn - IE you have the option. I opt not to face the Monolith. What's forcing me to do so?

Well that is kinda the point.

Im claiming you do not need to face it to have LOS (for it to be effective)

So can you cite where infantry get a 360 LoS?

Well you can draw a straight line from the model to a target, with you behind the model in any of 360. That "line" can be broken by terrain which is break your line of sight.

So it is not something to be proven as much as that is just how 3D space works. A straight line can be drawn through 3 points only if they line up.

How about you guys cite us where the rules are for drawing LoS for your models on another players turn. Because you guys can only say that LoS is only drawn when you are shooting at something or targeting something or your turn.

Helixthief - no, you're being a troll. Have a look at my posting history in YMDC. I have an intimate knowledge of the rules, and I have given page and paragraph showing where you are wrong.

You are free to continue posting made up rules if you wish, I will continue to call you on them.

nosferatu1001 wrote:Helixthief - no, you're being a troll. Have a look at my posting history in YMDC. I have an intimate knowledge of the rules, and I have given page and paragraph showing where you are wrong.

You are free to continue posting made up rules if you wish, I will continue to call you on them.

Well name calling is usually that last resort on threads. So I am going to take this as an unspoken conssession.

I offered to explain my viewpoint if you explained what part you didnt understand.

I offered to hear you viewpoint if you could back it up with actual rules (either as intended or as written but not both)

but you are hiding from either of these two prospects and in your frustration hurl insults. Just admit you are wrong dude, there is no shame, I wont rub it in or be a jerk. We can go about our lives, Id even buy you a pint if you were closer.

Well spoken helixthief. Everything is always better over a pint.

bladedragon03 wrote:How about you guys cite us where the rules are for drawing LoS for your models on another players turn. Because you guys can only say that LoS is only drawn when you are shooting at something or targeting something or your turn.

That rule doesn't exist - which is kind of the point. The Monolith door doesn't work well/at all with the RAW. It needs an FAQ to explain some of the questionable things about.

Well you can draw a straight line from the model to a target, with you behind the model in any of 360. That "line" can be broken by terrain which is break your line of sight.

So it is not something to be proven as much as that is just how 3D space works. A straight line can be drawn through 3 points only if they line up.

If you are standing facing a model, and the model is facing you, are you behind the model?

As for the Tyranid example you tried to use - some creatures with eyes on the side of their heads can see forwards. Even if you are trying to say Termagants can't, they can look broadside and still shoot just fine. I'm not sure I see the relevance of this line of debate.

rigeld2 wrote:I'm not sure I see the relevance of this line of debate.

Because some people find it entertaining to be draconian about a rules system that is written casually.

DarknessEternal wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:I'm not sure I see the relevance of this line of debate.

Because some people find it entertaining to be draconian about a rules system that is written casually.

I was specifically referring to the Tyranid eye issue that was brought up, but thanks for denigrating something I find fun.

Helix - not name calling. You are acting exactly like a troll.

I have given you rules and paragraphs which show you are wrong, repeatedly.

You ignore them.

Your view point is 100% proven wrong. Models do NOT have 360 LOS.

You can keep repeating made up rules, but you will be ignored.

nosferatu1001 wrote:but you will be ignored.

Exactly in the same manner than anyone claiming a model facing away from a Monolith is unaffected by Portal of Exile during an actual game would be.

Sorry, is this an actual game?

Or is this a forum to discuss rules?

I refer you to the Rage discussion, its quite an old one, where you can pull this exact same "trick"

nosferatu1001 wrote:Helix - not name calling. You are acting exactly like a troll.

I have given you rules and paragraphs which show you are wrong, repeatedly.

You ignore them.

Your view point is 100% proven wrong. Models do NOT have 360 LOS.

You can keep repeating made up rules, but you will be ignored.

Well I have been here a year and barely a dozen comments.

You have been here 3 and average 15 a day without fail...all of which seem to become arguments and name calling...

I come here look at rules, look at models, look at lists...the only reason I commmented on this is because it is so obvious that you are wrong.

I come here for 40k, you come here because you have no life and get jollies out of forum arguements....who is the troll now?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

rigeld2 wrote:

bladedragon03 wrote:How about you guys cite us where the rules are for drawing LoS for your models on another players turn. Because you guys can only say that LoS is only drawn when you are shooting at something or targeting something or your turn.

That rule doesn't exist - which is kind of the point. The Monolith door doesn't work well/at all with the RAW. It needs an FAQ to explain some of the questionable things about.

Well you can draw a straight line from the model to a target, with you behind the model in any of 360. That "line" can be broken by terrain which is break your line of sight.

So it is not something to be proven as much as that is just how 3D space works. A straight line can be drawn through 3 points only if they line up.

If you are standing facing a model, and the model is facing you, are you behind the model?

As for the Tyranid example you tried to use - some creatures with eyes on the side of their heads can see forwards. Even if you are trying to say Termagants can't, they can look broadside and still shoot just fine. I'm not sure I see the relevance of this line of debate.

Yes you can be behind a model and face to face with it. Behind is in relation to the target in my arugement. (much like you can be beside a car and using it for cover from gunfire...you are hiding behind the car, but not at its rear)

I brought up the tyranid because earlier in the Thread Nos said of my necron whose head is glued poorly and is facing the ground 5' in front of himself. That model would be unable to fire during the shooting phase since when you looked through the models eyes you would not see the target. I tried to debate; sometimes units can be looking away from a target for effect, but still can shoot the target. Of course I think Gants can shot their target, I just wanted to see how Nos answered this questions since it seems to contradict his rule for eyes.

helixthief wrote:Yes you can be behind a model and face to face with it. Behind is in relation to the target in my arugement. (much like you can be beside a car and using it for cover from gunfire...you are hiding behind the car, but not at its rear)

I brought up the tyranid because earlier in the Thread Nos said of my necron whose head is glued poorly and is facing the ground 5' in front of himself. That model would be unable to fire during the shooting phase since when you looked through the models eyes you would not see the target. I tried to debate; sometimes units can be looking away from a target for effect, but still can shoot the target. Of course I think Gants can shot their target, I just wanted to see how Nos answered this questions since it seems to contradict his rule for eyes.

I believe, but don't have my rulebook available, that the rule says to stand behind your model and then look at the target - not stand behind your model in reference to the target. See the difference?

You're correct - by the RAW the model staring at the ground would be unable to shoot similar to how blind models are unable to shoot. As I said earlier, that's something that is essentially always "house-ruled".

Helix - so personal insults now? Yawn.

Also - I never commented on your nid who is pointed at the ground. Ever. I just went back and checked every one of your comments, and this is the first time you have mentoned a nid who is looking at the ground directly infront.

The rules tell you to get behind your model. If you are in front of your model you are not behind it.

Oh look, you're still making up rules.

nosferatu1001 wrote:Helix - so personal insults now? Yawn.

Also - I never commented on your nid who is pointed at the ground. Ever. I just went back and checked every one of your comments, and this is the first time you have mentoned a nid who is looking at the ground directly infront.

The rules tell you to get behind your model. If you are in front of your model you are not behind it.

Oh look, you're still making up rules.

I will just reply with LOL for now on...Im sure you are on here just to get a rise out of people and I dont care, I thought you were debating rules, but you are just looking for attention.