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.

hyv3mynd wrote:Have you stepped back and looked at the page formatting as a whole?

I think on that, I can bid this thread adieu.

Testify wrote:

hyv3mynd wrote:Have you stepped back and looked at the page formatting as a whole?

I think on that, I can bid this thread adieu.

Cheers mate. Peace.

It matters because just like a plasma cannon is found under a larger category of plasma weapons that share the "gets hot" rule and melta guns are found with similar weapons with the melta rule, grounded is found UNDER swooping. It shares the same rules except the 2 it specifically removes.

[quote=Testify
Don't bring common sense into rules discussions please.

beigeknight wrote:

Testify wrote:
Don't bring common sense into rules discussions please.

I think this sums up the ridiculousness of these debates.

Of all the things we need in this world in every aspect of it, we're lacking in common sense. It's sad.

Sorry, I had to post this.

Okay so now I finally understand... GW uses a special secret code for the rules. Probably soon they will be selling us the decoder for a really fantastic deal too.

Just out of curiosity - if a Grounded Flying Montsrous Creature does retain 'Swooping', and therefore does retain the hard to hit rule, why is there a paragraph in the grounded rules about losing the Jink ability?

In the Grounded rules - it states you lose Jink, but can regain jink if you dive later in the game.

If you are 'Swooping', you are allowed to dive, which gives you Jink.

So you become Grounded, lose jink, but are apparently still Swooping, so you just dive again when you next get hit as allowed by both the Swooping rule and the Grounded rule.

By interpreting the rules such that a Flying Monstrous Creature who is Swooping, and becomes Grounded, retains Swooping, means this paragraph is completely and utterly useless.

READ THIS POST, BECAUSE IT'S IMPORTANT.

Ok, sorry, just had to get people's attention

RAW, the FMC doesn't lose the hard to hit rule. I believe that this is intentional. Why?

Like many things in 40k, all the shots in the shooting phase are supposedly fired simultaneously; it's done in different orders for simplicity's sake. So, technically, the FMC is still in the air till the end of the shooting phase. I mean, really, in an actual battle would it be "Alright, you rank of guardsmen there fire at the charging orks. Ok, can you see how many are dead? Excellent! Next squad to the right!"

RAW: Does the FMC lose the hard to hit rule? No.
RAI: Does the FMC lose the hard to hit rule? No.

DarkCorsair wrote:

Like many things in 40k, all the shots in the shooting phase are supposedly fired simultaneously; it's done in different orders for simplicity's sake. So, technically, the FMC is still in the air till the end of the shooting phase.

The shooting phase doesn't work like this. If it did work simultaneously (in game), you would declare all your targets at the start of your shooting phase. Otherwise you would have to say that you couldn't fire at a squad that was forced to disembark from a vehicle you wrecked early on in your shooting phase, because the guys are still in the vehicle until the end of the shooting phase. Now we all know this isn't correct.

If it is rules as intended that it retains the hard to hit rule, then this also doesn;t address my point above of writing a completely useless paragraph about losing the jink rule.

Flyrant gets Grounded - loses Jink as per grounded (but can get it again later in the game). Because he apparently still counts as Swooping, he can still dive, thus regaining the Jink rule (later in the game, as allowed by Grounded) for the very next shot - There is absolutely no point in writing this paragraph to remove Jink if the model still counts as Swooping. I know GW don't always write crystal clear rules, but they don't usually write in a specific rule that has absolutely no effect or meaning (other then the other part about allowing charges).

slice'n'dice wrote:

DarkCorsair wrote:

Like many things in 40k, all the shots in the shooting phase are supposedly fired simultaneously; it's done in different orders for simplicity's sake. So, technically, the FMC is still in the air till the end of the shooting phase.

The shooting phase doesn't work like this. If it did work simultaneously (in game), you would declare all your targets at the start of your shooting phase. Otherwise you would have to say that you couldn't fire at a squad that was forced to disembark from a vehicle you wrecked early on in your shooting phase, because the guys are still in the vehicle until the end of the shooting phase. Now we all know this isn't correct.

If it is rules as intended that it retains the hard to hit rule, then this also doesn;t address my point above of writing a completely useless paragraph about losing the jink rule.

Flyrant gets Grounded - loses Jink as per grounded (but can get it again later in the game). Because he apparently still counts as Swooping, he can still dive, thus regaining the Jink rule (later in the game, as allowed by Grounded) for the very next shot - There is absolutely no point in writing this paragraph to remove Jink if the model still counts as Swooping. I know GW don't always write crystal clear rules, but they don't usually write in a specific rule that has absolutely no effect or meaning (other then the other part about allowing charges).

Again, it's done that way for simplicity's sake.

And that has nothing in relation to the hard to hit rule. In a rules argument, saying "this implies that this should say something different" doesn't work. I was simply pointing out in my response that RAW it does not lose hard to it, and that RAI it could make sense too. In other words, you don't lose it either way, unless you want to change the rules. Even NOVA is ruling it that you don't lose hard to hit. Now, have I been playing it that my FMC's lose it? Of course I have! However, if we're arguing over what the rules say, you can't use interpretations based off of obscure implications.

How you actually play it says a lot more than how you would like to play it. I do applaud your honesty though.

I also play it as easy to hit and have since 6th dropped. Not everyone has ulterior motives or bias like some would think on dakka. I also don't want my first games with and impressions of the new rules to be tainted by rules arguments.

At the end of the day, there's not a huge difference at least from my games. They still soak a huge amount of firepower to take down and more focus again once they're down.

The point of arguing the RAW vs RAI is I fully expect the FAQ to reinforce that hard to hit is never removed by failing a grounding test. And I accept that others think the notion is ridiculous. I haven't read the NOVA FAQ yet, but they have a big team behind everything they do so it must have been a consensus. The new rules are not written perfectly. Often we're surprised by the direction FAQ's take. Tyranid players are familiar with this from the alternating SiTW/vehicle rulings, DoM rulings, IC rulings, etc.

For all we know they could rule it one way next month and reverse it next year.

I remember a case made here that nemesis force falchions confer +2 attacks. It was hotly debated with lots of diagrams and red elipses around certain phrases. End of the day it on,y confers +1 attack which is pretty good in my opinion.

Dozer Blades wrote:I remember a case made here that nemesis force falchions confer +2 attacks. It was hotly debated with lots of diagrams and red elipses around certain phrases. End of the day it on,y confers +1 attack which is pretty good in my opinion.

The +2A side actually won the argument from a technical standpoint, the opposition had no rules support. But GW ruled against the RAW and thats all that mattered.

And Falchions SUCK with only +1A. For the extra points compared to the killing power of the other options they are horrendiously overcosted.

Grey Templar wrote:

Dozer Blades wrote:I remember a case made here that nemesis force falchions confer +2 attacks. It was hotly debated with lots of diagrams and red elipses around certain phrases. End of the day it on,y confers +1 attack which is pretty good in my opinion.

The +2A side actually won the argument from a technical standpoint, the opposition had no rules support. But GW ruled against the RAW and thats all that mattered.

And Falchions SUCK with only +1A. For the extra points compared to the killing power of the other options they are horrendiously overcosted.

The Falchion debacle was very irritating. The RAW, fluff text, and arguably RAI clearly pointed towards +2 attacks. GW, however, spake otherwise and Falchions were placed back in a dusty vault on Titan, never to be wielded again.

I expect the same scenario will occur in this example. The RAW is clear, but in this case I think the intent of the rule (and the fluff) actually leans towards the opposite reading.

It's an interesting argument, to be sure, but I definitely believe the "does not lose Hard to Hit" camp have a much stronger case. Regardless, GT is correct, GW will tell us how they want us to play and we shall obey.

DoW

slice'n'dice wrote:Just out of curiosity - if a Grounded Flying Montsrous Creature does retain 'Swooping', and therefore does retain the hard to hit rule, why is there a paragraph in the grounded rules about losing the Jink ability?

In the Grounded rules - it states you lose Jink, but can regain jink if you dive later in the game.

If you are 'Swooping', you are allowed to dive, which gives you Jink.

So you become Grounded, lose jink, but are apparently still Swooping, so you just dive again when you next get hit as allowed by both the Swooping rule and the Grounded rule.

By interpreting the rules such that a Flying Monstrous Creature who is Swooping, and becomes Grounded, retains Swooping, means this paragraph is completely and utterly useless.

That paragraph would only be useless if the FMC didn't retain swooping. If it does retain swooping, the rules are necessary to get rid of jink and make it a legal target for assault. If it didn't retain swooping, i.e. it just said "and is no longer swooping", the rules wouldn't need to call out the fact that you no longer have jink and can be assaulted.

jcress410 wrote:

slice'n'dice wrote:
Just out of curiosity - if a Grounded Flying Montsrous Creature does retain 'Swooping', and therefore does retain the hard to hit rule, why is there a paragraph in the grounded rules about losing the Jink ability?

In the Grounded rules - it states you lose Jink, but can regain jink if you dive later in the game.

If you are 'Swooping', you are allowed to dive, which gives you Jink.

So you become Grounded, lose jink, but are apparently still Swooping, so you just dive again when you next get hit as allowed by both the Swooping rule and the Grounded rule.

By interpreting the rules such that a Flying Monstrous Creature who is Swooping, and becomes Grounded, retains Swooping, means this paragraph is completely and utterly useless.

That paragraph would only be useless if the FMC didn't retain swooping. If it does retain swooping, the rules are necessary to get rid of jink and make it a legal target for assault. If it didn't retain swooping, i.e. it just said "and is no longer swooping", the rules wouldn't need to call out the fact that you no longer have jink and can be assaulted.

Actually, it is the complete opposite, which is why I raised the point in the first place.

You see, being swooping does not give you jink - diving does. Diving can only be done if you are swooping, and gives you Jink for the rest of the turn.

So lets suppose that when you become grounded - you do in fact lose swooping. In this case, one unit fires at my flyer, and I decide to Dive (because I am swooping). This gives me the jink special rule until the end of turn. Now, if my Flyer becomes grounded (and assuming this means I lose swooping) - I would normally still retain the Jink special rule, as this is not dependent on Swooping. However, the Grounded special rule specifically removes the Jink special rule. Also, as I can no longer Swoop until the start of my next movement phase (where I choose my flying State), I cannot Dive to regain the Jink special rule until I am swooping again (note the grounded special rule specifically allows me to regain the Jink rule 'later' in the game.

So if grounded means you lose swooping, the whole rule around Grounding making you lose Jink makes perfect sense.

Now lets suppose that when you become grounded - you do not lose swooping. In this case, one unit fires at my flyer, and I decide to Dive (because I am swooping). This gives me the jink special rule until the end of turn. Now, if my Flyer becomes grounded (and assuming this means I do not lose swooping) - I will still lose my Jink special rule as before. However, because I am still Swooping, I can still Dive - which means I can regain the Jink special rule at the very next unit that shoots at my flyer, as long as the Grounded special rule does not prevent me from regaining the Jink rule later in the game. As the Grounded rule does let me re-gain Jink later in the game though, the removal of the Jink rule becomes useless. You fire unit one at my flyer, and ground me, and I lose the Jink rule. You fire unit 2 at my Flyer, and as I'm still Swooping, I dive again which allows me to re-gain the Jink rule.

If the grounded rule stated that I would lose Jink until the next turn, it would make sense, but it does not.

I'm not trying to state here that anyone is deliberately trying to gain advantage by playing this rule one way or another (I think there are clear advantages and disadvantages to playing it either way) - I'm just trying to point out that by playing it as 'Retains Swooping', it actually makes one of the specific rules relating to Grounded useless.

You miss that the only way to Dive is if you are swooping. If you arn't swooping you cannot dive.

Reread his post. If a Grounded FMC loses Swooping, then you cannot dive and thus cannot regain jink. If you do not lose Swooping, then you can jink for every unit that shots at you.

Sure, but you must redeclare Dive each time they shoot at you.

GW sure messed up on this rule whatever is correct.


Prediction of FAQ.

"FMC retain Hard to Hit and may take multiple grounding tests, but may not Dive for the rest of the turn."

This thread makes me want to cry.

Other than that, GW, my god, when will you ever learn to write rules properly so misinterpretation doesn't cause long winded debates about such a ruling..

From the start of 6th I played FMC's lose HtH when grounded and are no longer Swooping.
To me this seems RAI even though you would want them to be in the same class as Flying Veichles, they are not.

Cmon guys, a bouncing up and down Flyrant isn't logical or cinematic.

Games Workshop, pull your f'ing finger out.

L0rdF1end wrote:This thread makes me want to cry.

Other than that, GW, my god, when will you ever learn to write rules properly so misinterpretation doesn't cause long winded debates about such a ruling..

From the start of 6th I played FMC's lose HtH when grounded and are no longer Swooping.
To me this seems RAI even though you would want them to be in the same class as Flying Veichles, they are not.

Cmon guys, a bouncing up and down Flyrant isn't logical or cinematic.

Games Workshop, pull your f'ing finger out.

I play it that way too, because it makes sense for them to lose HtH.

I'm glad another person agrees that the rule is written poorly, however, to even allow a 6+ page thread on this topic (plus 2 or 3 previous threads as well).

Here's crossing fingers that it's addressed in the rumored forthcoming FAQ for the 6th ed rulebook./

I don't think it's badly written at all.
The internet is not real life. I could have read this rule a hundred times and it wouldn't have occurred to me to claim that I still had Hard To Hit.

Testify wrote:I don't think it's badly written at all.
The internet is not real life. I could have read this rule a hundred times and it wouldn't have occurred to me to claim that I still had Hard To Hit.

The rule is badly written for people that follow the rule logically as it was written.
The problem being Grounded does not specify clearly enough that Swooping is lost when Grounded.

When we think about the terms used and read it as it was a book and not a rule logical sense fills the void and Grounded clearly was meant to mean your FMC is no longer Swooping.

Testify wrote:

hyv3mynd wrote:
denote it as a modifier, not an independent state.

Source? Where does it say this in the rulebook.

It doesn't, you're inferring it.

It is hilarious that you say this when your entire argument seems to be based on inference.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Testify wrote:I don't think it's badly written at all.
The internet is not real life. I could have read this rule a hundred times and it wouldn't have occurred to me to claim that I still had Hard To Hit.

Also, I thought you had bid this thread adieu?

L0rdF1end wrote:The problem being Grounded does not specify clearly enough that Swooping is lost when Grounded.

That is because Grounded tells you exactly what you lose.

Swooping is not amongst the things lost.

Wrong... The rule doesn't tell you to keep swooping. You lose the jink and you can be assaulted. It's explicit you're no longer swooping anymore.

Saw a dude at my FLGS throw a tantrum when we wouldn't let him keep swooping. He got all red in the face and started shouting.

Dozer Blades wrote:Wrong... The rule doesn't tell you to keep swooping.

Incorrect.

It does not have to, as you are already Swooping because you declared it as the MC's movement mode and it lasts until your next movement phase. Nothing take Swooping away. (Permissive Ruleset tells us this is true)

Dozer Blades wrote:You lose the jink and you can be assaulted. It's explicit you're no longer swooping anymore.

Saw a dude at my FLGS throw a tantrum when we wouldn't let him keep swooping. He got all red in the face and started shouting.

The Bold text is correct.

The Underlined Text is not correct. It is not explicit. It does not explicitly tell you Swooping is lost.

It might be implicit, but it is definitely not explicit.

He was right to be upset by your claim, because your claim has no RAW support.

DeathReaper wrote:

L0rdF1end wrote:The problem being Grounded does not specify clearly enough that Swooping is lost when Grounded.

That is because Grounded tells you exactly what you lose.

Swooping is not amongst the things lost.

+1 Internets for you sir.

DR has got it right. All Grounded does is modify the properties of Swooping. RAW it's a bit silly. RAI, probably should lose Swooping (and it's associated benefits).

Couple of rhetorical questions:

1.) Are there only two flight modes for an FMC to choose from at the start of its Movement?
2.) Is Grounded one of the flight modes that can be chosen?
3.) When a FMC is Grounded, does the Grounded rule explicitly state (permissive rule set) that the FMC loses the Swooping rule?
4.) If you think that Grounded does indeed remove the Swooping flight mode, then what flight mode does the FMC have? (see questions 1 & 2)
5.) Does the Grounded rule mechanic explicitly state (permissive rule set) that the FMC no longer has the HtH property?

-Yad

Dozer Blades wrote:Saw a dude at my FLGS throw a tantrum when we wouldn't let him keep swooping. He got all red in the face and started shouting.

You should You Tube that kind of behaviour so we can all laugh.

Unfortunately, as the current ruling is written, Swooping remains in play when Grounded. MASSIVE oversight by GW.

Dozer Blades wrote:Wrong... The rule doesn't tell you to keep swooping. You lose the jink and you can be assaulted. It's explicit you're no longer swooping anymore.

Actually that would be the very definition of implicit (and absolutely not explicit) . "A and B are true," so C must be true; C was a conclusion you feel was implied by A and B. "C is true," would be explicit. Unfortunately, GW was not explicit with what happens with Swooping one way or the other. Until they do it's going to be house rules and hilarious red faced tantrum throwers. Come up with a consensus, shake hands, have a fun game.