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.

Dooley wrote:Please post a page and citation of this rule!

Which one? The Night Scythe one is page 51 of the Necron Codex - it's been quoted in this thread.
Crash and Burn (the source of the S10 hit) is page 81 in the BRB, bottom left corner.

I notice the FAQs are down. Wonder why...

Dozer Blades wrote:I notice the FAQs are down. Wonder why...

Back up on US site, no changes.

My 2 cents here:

Fluffwise / maybe RAI - They aren't actually there so the hit couldnt happen.

RAW and how it should be played until a possible FAQ - They take the S10 hit then go to reserve. The wording in the codex and FAQ both state they are embarked in the night scythe. The rulebook states when the vehicles explodes the passengers take the hits THEN disembark. Their rule says instead of disembarking they enter reserves instead. The main point being INSTEAD OF DISEMBARKING and not AS SOON AS THE SCYTHE IS DESTROYED.

Not a shock - the digital editions were updated recently, with entries not in the FAQ

They aren't down.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

mch21689 wrote:

Dozer Blades wrote:I notice the FAQs are down. Wonder why...

Back up on US site, no changes.

My 2 cents here:

Fluffwise / maybe RAI - They aren't actually there so the hit couldnt happen.

RAW and how it should be played until a possible FAQ - They take the S10 hit then go to reserve. The wording in the codex and FAQ both state they are embarked in the night scythe. The rulebook states when the vehicles explodes the passengers take the hits THEN disembark. Their rule says instead of disembarking they enter reserves instead. The main point being INSTEAD OF DISEMBARKING and not AS SOON AS THE SCYTHE IS DESTROYED.

Crash and Burn does not say that the embarked models disembark. They are simply placed within 3" of the blast marker. The rule, as it is written, does nothing.

You never place them within 3" pf the blast marker as they go right back into reserve. mch has the gist of it.

Crash and Burn states any models within the transport suffer a Str 10 hit with no armor saves. Survivors are then placed. Any models that cannot be placed are removed as casualties.


RAW - They are embarked on the scythe, therefore they are within it. So they take the S10 hit and then instead of being placed are put in reserve.

If you want to argue they are not physically "within", then I would argue you aren't disembarking then and since you have to go into reserve instead of disembarking (which isn't happening as the models are simply "placed") then unit doesnt enter reserves....it is placed on the field as normal making the rule do nothing.


Either way regardless of whether they go into reserve or deploy on the field because the rule does nothing, the unit still suffers the Str 10 hit.

A lot of people here don't agree with you for what that is worth.

Dozer Blades wrote:A lot of people here don't agree with you for what that is worth.

Can any of them provide actual rules support?

Well its this easy the wasghiton GW stores say they go into reserves not taking a hit as that is were i play counting battle bunker its a done issue for me. Waiting to hear back from throne of bones but if its the same there really kinda will end debate.

wow this thread just keeps going on.. I don't even have a night scythe yet so i'm not going to worry about it.. i'll stick with VOD, Ghost Ark, Monolith, and CCB as mode of transport for my stuff.

captain-crud wrote:Well its this easy the wasghiton GW stores say they go into reserves not taking a hit as that is were i play counting battle bunker its a done issue for me. Waiting to hear back from throne of bones but if its the same there really kinda will end debate.

It might be a done issue for you, but unfortunately a store employee is nowhere near an end all for all of us as a whole. At almost $50 a model I am sure the retail stores will side with whatever rule makes the model more appealing too. Not like you would want to drop the money on a scythe if RAW proved the special rule did in fact nothing?

I can guarantee if I drive to Indy and Chicago and ask people at every brick and mortar or bunker, I will come home with 2-3 different answers.

Dozer Blades wrote:A lot of people here don't agree with you for what that is worth.

Except theyre disagreeing with no rules support.

Or at least, none that has been shown

Can i ask why this argument never came up in the 5th ed ?

Because with 5th ed rule the Nightscythe exploded and with the take the hits sides argument you would have rolled for the guys in side to see how may took wounds and you would also have rolled for pinning yet it never was an issue .

Now Either way you look at it if as we believe the Dex was written with the 6th in mind why would the Nightscythe have this rule of going in to reserve other than to negate the hits ,as any other stance no matter how you use RAW makes no logical sense at all, other that to purposely hurt the necrons and no one else,

When RAW fails to be clear or when RAW contradicts logic ,it is logical to delve deeper to find the answer ,

Now if the rule is FAQ'ed and or the digital Dex is updated to state the Necrons do not take the hits where will that leave the RAW is law brigade ?because in doing so GW would have just been clarifying what the no hit side have been saying ,which would prove in this case that RAW as read by the take the hits side is wrong .

So RAW would then become useless since having been proved wrong how can we ever trust it again ? but since the game designers and codex writers have from the beginning of time expected people to use RAI ,RAW logic and commonsense to sort out rules issues it would prove RAW alone is not a good enough argument .

So we have 2 choices you can either sit and wait for GW to do your thinking for you and explain it exactly how you want (which would make this game unplayable), or you can use your own judgment based on all the evidence not just part of it(RAW ) and come to the correct conclusion based on all that evidence.

Since some people refuse to budge on there stance to this issue until told different by that elusive official ruling form the game designers this argument will not end untill that said official ruling .

OH and yes how many of the no hit brigade are willing to come here and admit they were wrong should it be proved that they are? as i will be happy to admit i am wrong should any future ruling prove that i am wrong

snakel wrote:Can i ask why this argument never came up in the 5th ed ?

Probably because the model wasn't out until shortly before 6th.

Your other arguments have been refuted in previous posts.

snakel wrote:Can i ask why this argument never came up in the 5th ed ?

It did locally.

Because with 5th ed rule the Nightscythe exploded and with the take the hits sides argument you would have rolled for the guys in side to see how may took wounds and you would also have rolled for pinning yet it never was an issue .

It did for some people.

Now Either way you look at it if as we believe the Dex was written with the 6th in mind why would the Nightscythe have this rule of going in to reserve other than to negate the hits ,as any other stance no matter how you use RAW makes no logical sense at all, other that to purposely hurt the necrons and no one else,

False. Having your unit go into reserve is not always a penalty.

When RAW fails to be clear or when RAW contradicts logic ,it is logical to delve deeper to find the answer ,

How is it not clear? How does it contradict logic?

Now if the rule is FAQ'ed and or the digital Dex is updated to state the Necrons do not take the hits where will that leave the RAW is law brigade ?because in doing so GW would have just been clarifying what the no hit side have been saying ,which would prove in this case that RAW as read by the take the hits side is wrong .

FAQs can change rules. Right now I'm not wrong.

OH and yes how many of the no hit brigade are willing to come here and admit they were wrong should it be proved that they are? as i will be happy to admit i am wrong should any future ruling prove that i am wrong

I am not wrong right now, as you can show me no rules that I am.
Should the rules change in the future that would obviously change how the rules read.
Rules changing in the future does not make me wrong now.

If you'd be happy to admit you're wrong in the future, why can you not admit you're wrong now?

So let's go ahead and case closed this thing.

If the scythe crashes and burns, CURRENTLY, they take the hits, are PLACED on the table, and the special rule of entering reserves is useless per current RAW.

Does the RAW coincide with fluff? No.

Does this effect RAW? No.

Will this probably get FAQ'd? Yes.

For now, RAW does not support avoiding the hits OR entering back into reserve.

I made some bone headed mistakes what I said here. For that I apologize to everyone. Discussion of the rules needs honesty over bias. I will wait to see if there is a FAQ. I play foot armies so no big deal to me in regards to my own games. My apology again.

Wow, what a dumb argument... valid kind of, but seriously, I think everyone I knew was expecting the dudes inside not to take any S10 hits.

The S10 hit is for "fall damage". They don't fall. If it was just an explosion, S4 and be done.... Hell, the fluff is 100% in support with the description. Normally I'm all about RAW, but since this is a giant cluster eff, yo, those guys aren't actually in there. They don't "asplode".

W/E, I'll play it as my FLGS plays it. This has to get FAQ'd, but knowing GW, they'll FAQ it opposite to the fluff and counter to sense (like Anrakyr in a CCB... CANT SEE CRAP, YO!)

How is it dumb? We've come to a conclusion that obeys all game rules and can be used in tournament play. I don't care if you choose to play it differently. Heck, keep using all power weapons as AP2/1/ignores armor/whatever. That's fine.

You are, as notated in the forum itself and multiple times in this thread, in YMDC, where we only take RAW into account. The argument is not dumb if we don't come to the conclusion you want. Please don't post or just ignore YMDC if you don't care about that/will play however you want.

I have never understood how individuals determine - within a unit entry - how to decide what are Rules and what is fluff.

Frankly, I don't believe - within a unit entry - that such a distinction can be easily made. It is my feeling that the entirety of the particular entry must be used to make a proper decision regarding how to play that particular unit.

Within the Night Scythes unit description, 1st column 3rd paragraph (which continues through the remainder of the paragraph at the top of the 2nd column) there is text which explicitly states that the Scythe "... mimics the ... role of a more conventional transport vehicle without jeopardising the existence of its assigned squad. If... destroyed, its payload squad is simply isolated from the battle until an alternate means of deployment can be established. Though this invariably prevents the squad from taking part in the immediate battle, this is preferable to them being destroyed outright as they can join the campaign's later stages."

Now I refer to p 80 of the main rule book and refer to what happens to passengers when a Transport is Wrecked or Explodes! to see that these entries include explanations of how to deal with embarked passengers.

Then I continue on to the rules for Crash and Burn on p 81. On p 81 is mentions models "within" suffering a S10 hit, etc, and finally it specifies how "Survivors" are to be placed.

I go back to the Scythe's rules and I determine that if my opponent is playing Necrons, I would tell him that his Jump Infantry or Bikes were never truly within the vehicle so they do not suffer the effects of passengers within more prosaic transports.

After all, the unit entry states that "...the embarked unit...", not the "survivors" of, are not allowed to disembark but instead enter reserves.

No damage, go to reserves.

katfude wrote:How is it dumb? We've come to a conclusion that obeys all game rules and can be used in tournament play. I don't care if you choose to play it differently. Heck, keep using all power weapons as AP2/1/ignores armor/whatever. That's fine.

You are, as notated in the forum itself and multiple times in this thread, in YMDC, where we only take RAW into account. The argument is not dumb if we don't come to the conclusion you want. Please don't post or just ignore YMDC if you don't care about that/will play however you want.

The problem with your 'obeys all the game rules' is you are ignoring the 'the codex supercedes the main book' rule. That said, you've heard that one at least a couple of times from me personally, and a few more from other posters. Anyhow, by all means play as you wish.

Neorealist wrote:The problem with your 'obeys all the game rules' is you are ignoring the 'the codex supercedes the main book' rule.

The problem with your 'rule' is that it is not a rule, nor is it always true. There are times when the rulebook takes precedence.

Neorealist wrote:

katfude wrote:How is it dumb? We've come to a conclusion that obeys all game rules and can be used in tournament play. I don't care if you choose to play it differently. Heck, keep using all power weapons as AP2/1/ignores armor/whatever. That's fine.

You are, as notated in the forum itself and multiple times in this thread, in YMDC, where we only take RAW into account. The argument is not dumb if we don't come to the conclusion you want. Please don't post or just ignore YMDC if you don't care about that/will play however you want.

The problem with your 'obeys all the game rules' is you are ignoring the 'the codex supercedes the main book' rule. That said, you've heard that one at least a couple of times from me personally, and a few more from other posters. Anyhow, by all means play as you wish.

When there's a conflict. There's no conflict here.
You still haven't come forward with actual rules support to counter anything I've said - or did I miss it?

Nah, i don't think i've really added anything new since i said that the nightscythe rule replaces the transport part of the 'crash and burn' rules and pointed out that RAW doesn't really support partially applying a rule unless a more advanced rule explicitly calls for it.

We argued for a while about wether or not it replaces the entire thing or just certain sections of it; but with no real indication in RAW regarding timing or wether or not the 'crash and burn' transport rules are all one rule, or 3-4 rules and if so what the timing is for applying the ones that don't conflict with the nightscythe one; so i more or less let it go until i noticed the poster quoted in my prior comment posted something that know to be against the rules as written.

In short i don't have anything new to add, i just wanted to note that the argument being stated was a bit flawed.


Edit:

Ghaz wrote:The problem with your 'rule' is that it is not a rule, nor is it always true. There are times when the rulebook takes precedence.

Oh and this is also wrong:

6th ed Rulebook, page 7 wrote:On rare occasions, a conflict will arise between a rule in this rulebook, and one printed in a codex.'Where this occurs, the rule printed in the codex always takes precedence.

Neorealist wrote: so i more or less let it go until i noticed the poster quoted in my prior comment posted something that know to be against the rules as written.

Like what?

In short i don't have anything new to add, i just wanted to note that the argument being stated was a bit flawed.

It's not, but okay.

Isn't there something about the spirit of the game taking precedence and rolling a d6 if you and your opponent do not agree on the interpenetration of the rule under General Principles of the rule book.

rigeld2 wrote:Like what?

The part where they ignored the nightscythe rule in it's entirety in favour of applying the 'crash and burn' transport rules in 'their' entirety.

Neorealist wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:Like what?

The part where they ignored the nightscythe rule in it's entirety in favour of applying the 'crash and burn' transport rules in 'their' entirety.

Taken literally, the Night Scythe rule does nothing.
Disagree? When do you disembark?
That's right - a destroyed Night Scythe's contents don't disembark.
Oh you still want to go to reserves? You're supposed to do that instead of doing something else... What was that...
Oh, right - disembarking. Which you can't do.

Allowing you to go to reserve when the models are placed still puts it after the S10 hit.
You cannot replace the Crash n Burn rule in its entirety as a) you don't have anything that tells you too b) that would mean the Night Scythe never become a wreck.

What possible leg do you have left to stand on? Fluff?

rigeld2 wrote:Taken literally, the Night Scythe rule does nothing.
Disagree? When do you disembark?
That's right - a destroyed Night Scythe's contents don't disembark.
Oh you still want to go to reserves? You're supposed to do that instead of doing something else... What was that...
Oh, right - disembarking. Which you can't do.

Allowing you to go to reserve when the models are placed still puts it after the S10 hit.
You cannot replace the Crash n Burn rule in its entirety as a) you don't have anything that tells you too b) that would mean the Night Scythe never become a wreck.

What possible leg do you have left to stand on? Fluff?

To Answer your questions in the order you posted them:
1) Yes.
2) You'll never disembark. (well, as part of resolving either rule anyway. i assumed you were writing from the perspective of the embarked unit and responded in kind)
3) When the Nightscythe is destroyed; so instead of taking a strength 10 no armor saves allowed hit, then being placed on the table within 3 inches of a blast marker, then being destroyed if you are unable to be placed. (i assumed you were writing from the perspective of the embarked unit and responded in kind)
4) No it does not.
5) The 'Codex trumps Basic book' rule and the 'Nightscythe Portal' rule tells you to.
6) I have two legs thank you, and they as of this date work quite well i'm relieved to say. That said, to literally answer your question? 'RAW'.