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.

rigeld2 wrote:

Happyjew wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:

 Dozer Blades wrote:
I find it hilarious that many of the heavily entrenched claims made here by our resident rules lawyers have been swept away. It is a glorious moment for all who fairly play!

Care to point out some?

MSS v Force weapons to name one.

I was asking because his statement was mildly insulting, but pretre had a better response so ... yeah.

Don't be so defensive.

You were wrong about FMC and grounding tests to name just one.

 Dozer Blades wrote:
Don't be so defensive.

You were wrong about FMC and grounding tests to name just one.

At the time, he may have been correct, however (depending on which one you're talking about).

Actually at the time his stance was possibly correct. Just because they clarified it doesn't mean he was wrong.

If someone claimed that SitW affected models in vehicles before the FAQ said it did not would you claim they were wrong?

 Dozer Blades wrote:
You were wrong about FMC and grounding tests to name just one.

No, I wasn't "wrong". I was correct as to what was written. GW's intent doesn't matter.
If I continued to assert that Swooping FMCs don't switch to Gliding I'd be wrong - but I'm not.

And saying that I don't play fair because I try to follow the rules as written most of the time... isn't correct and won't ever be. You keep that idea in your head though - I'm sure you'll go far.

For the most part the FAQs clarify things in the common sense direction.

Most times people arguing strict RAW, even when the RAW is an obvious typographical or syntax error are just being obtuse.

Kevlar wrote:
Most times people arguing strict RAW, even when the RAW is an obvious typographical or syntax error are just being obtuse.

You use the acronym RAW and yet don't understand what it means.

Kevlar wrote:
For the most part the FAQs clarify things in the common sense direction.

Most times people arguing strict RAW, even when the RAW is an obvious typographical or syntax error are just being obtuse.

Yeah, Shadows in the Warp flip flops, Spore Cloud FAQ, few others... totally common sense direction.

And one can argue RAW while not playing that way. I've done that quite often actually. So do many others that are "being obtuse".

I ninja rigeld2 like I was getting paid for it.

Hate.

The real question is to why a person feels the need to direct a "gotcha" claim against rigeld in the first place. This is a place for debating RAW mechanics not trying to divine what GW intends.

The faq just means we move on, who gives a damn if someones position was or was not reinforced. The goal is better understanding of the rules not inscribing a win hash mark on your "internet argument" calendar.

rigeld2 wrote:
Hate.

/hugs

rigeld2 wrote:

 Dozer Blades wrote:
You were wrong about FMC and grounding tests to name just one.

No, I wasn't "wrong". I was correct as to what was written. GW's intent doesn't matter.
If I continued to assert that Swooping FMCs don't switch to Gliding I'd be wrong - but I'm not.

And saying that I don't play fair because I try to follow the rules as written most of the time... isn't correct and won't ever be. You keep that idea in your head though - I'm sure you'll go far.

You were wrong. The rules as written never said that the FMC remained swooping. You tried to imply it and claimed you are RAW. And no it is not hate... I find you absolutely hilarious.

From the rulebook FAQ:

Q: Do models that ignore difficult terrain when moving or charging still fight at Initiative step 1 if they charge through difficult terrain? (p22)
A: Yes.

Important safety notice if you use Harlequin flip belts. That terrain that you're ignoring still affects you.

 Lt.Soundwave wrote:
The real question is to why a person feels the need to direct a "gotcha" claim against rigeld in the first place. This is a place for debating RAW mechanics not trying to divine what GW intends.

The faq just means we move on, who gives a damn if someones position was or was not reinforced. The goal is better understanding of the rules not inscribing a win hash mark on your "internet argument" calendar.

I would imagine because he is one of the "prolific" posters who feels the need to repeat his position over and over again in a simple rules debate. Look at some of the debates, he will have 30, 40 posts all with the same response.

 solkan wrote:
From the rulebook FAQ:

Q: Do models that ignore difficult terrain when moving or charging still fight at Initiative step 1 if they charge through difficult terrain? (p22)
A: Yes.

Important safety notice if you use Harlequin flip belts. That terrain that you're ignoring still affects you.

And C'tan, and Pathfinders...

Still a tad less mature then I would hope we strive to be.

rigeld2 wrote:

 Dozer Blades wrote:
You were wrong about FMC and grounding tests to name just one.

No, I wasn't "wrong". I was correct as to what was written. GW's intent doesn't matter.
If I continued to assert that Swooping FMCs don't switch to Gliding I'd be wrong - but I'm not.

And saying that I don't play fair because I try to follow the rules as written most of the time... isn't correct and won't ever be. You keep that idea in your head though - I'm sure you'll go far.

Sad thing is that due to a "typo" rigeld2 is still correct about shooting at grounded units.

Page 49 – Flying Monstrous Creatures, Grounded Tests.
Change the second sentence of the third paragraph to read “A
Grounded Flying Monstrous Creature is treated as if it is in
Glide mode with immediate effect,

So Grounded== Gliding

Q: How do maelstroms, novas and beams – or indeed any weapon
that doesn’t need to roll To Hit or hits automatically – interact with
Zooming Flyers and Gliding Flying Monstrous Creatures? (p13)
A: Only Snap Shots can hit Zooming Flyers and Gliding
Flying Monstrous Creatures.

So as of right now a case can be made that FMC's never loose Hard to Hit as they have it in both Glide and Swoop now. Check the FAQ. They really made that mistake.

Welcome to the next 3 months of YMDC and how this mess all works.

 solkan wrote:
From the rulebook FAQ:

Q: Do models that ignore difficult terrain when moving or charging still fight at Initiative step 1 if they charge through difficult terrain? (p22)
A: Yes.

Important safety notice if you use Harlequin flip belts. That terrain that you're ignoring still affects you.

Except that if they are taking harlies without a Shadowseer (who gives them hallucinogen Grenades) they deserve to be I1 and not realize it.

Welcome to the next 3 months of YMDC and how this mess all works.

Sadly true.

 Gloomfang wrote:
Welcome to the next 3 months of YMDC and how this mess all works.

Nah, that one is extremely obvious - yes it's what's Written, but I'd never, ever try and play that way.

Happyjew wrote:


And C'tan, and Pathfinders...

Pretty sure C'tan gets assault grenades, or at least an option to take them.

Fateweaver's re-rolls only apply to Chaos Daemons.

Chaos Icons only work for their respective armies.

Chaos Marine Daemons Princes are now flying monstrous creatures, oh my.

Kevlar wrote:

Happyjew wrote:


And C'tan, and Pathfinders...

Pretty sure C'tan gets assault grenades, or at least an option to take them.

No assault grenades for C'tan.

This thread went downhill real quick.

 60mm wrote:
This thread went downhill real quick.

Oh? Were simply discussing the changes made in the latest FAQs. If some people want to play the "Nah nah nah, I was right and you were wrong" game they can, they will just be ignored due to irrelevancy.

rigeld2 wrote:

 Gloomfang wrote:
Welcome to the next 3 months of YMDC and how this mess all works.

Nah, that one is extremely obvious - yes it's what's Written, but I'd never, ever try and play that way.

Considering I know that we have spent a few months arguing with people that said the rules do not allow division, you know it is going to come up.

Besides we are arguing RAW, not RAI.

Still ticked off about not being able to use my Dante counts as model for my Fleshtearers anymore.

And lets be a big man. Here are the list of issues I was on the wrong side of:

Broodlords being able to use Witchfire powers.
Psykic Overwatch
ADL being able to be deployed in multipul sections
Spore pods being tanked shocked.
Flyers being able to skyfire in hovermode
Units in Flyers that are not dedicated transports counting against reserve limits.

If I argued with you and you were right feel free to PM me an I told you so (Please note what you were right about so I do not get confused.)

Happyjew wrote:

Kevlar wrote:

Happyjew wrote:


And C'tan, and Pathfinders...

Pretty sure C'tan gets assault grenades, or at least an option to take them.

No assault grenades for C'tan.

Spirit Dust gives them assault grenades, defensive grenades, and Stealth.

MSS and NFW, ID and FNP, the blood lance one.....les' see... Oh god my tau markerlight one! That one really stings :(

Happyjew wrote:

Kevlar wrote:

Happyjew wrote:


And C'tan, and Pathfinders...

Pretty sure C'tan gets assault grenades, or at least an option to take them.

No assault grenades for C'tan.

What about swarm of spirit dust?

Already pointed out to me. If you want to burn 20 pts and a manifestation slot for assault/defensive grenades and a +1 Cover saves be my guest.

My FD Exarch with Crack Shot is standing by with his Twin-linked Quad-Gun.