Author |
Message |
 |
|
 |
Advert
|
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. |
|
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2008/02/27 16:26:42
Subject: Neural Shredder--Continued from "INAT_FAQ" thread in News and Rumors
|
 |
Dakka Veteran
|
colonelellios wrote: Moz wrote:I'm so glad this rule is so perfectly clear to everyone. To put a clarification in a FAQ would be stupid, and incompetent.
Did I get that right?
Yes, it would be stupid to include in a FAQ. In an environment as competitive as the one at Adepticon, you would hope that everyone involved would have at least read the first paragraph of p. 23 in the BGB... And realized that the NS's "strength characteristic," as defined there, is in fact "X," and therefore can not possibly interact with the instant death rule, which presumably operates on the "strength characteristic" defined on p. 23. Weapons of "S X," one would hope that it obviously follows, work in exception to the rules laid out by the BGB...
Thereby, being only found at this point in Codex books, and not referencing the main rule set in any way, weapons of "S X" do in fact operate in their own little never-never land, independent of the main rule set, because specific codex rules override the main rules however specifically stated.
EDIT: Really, I think it's completely pathetic that I had to resort to pointing out in detail one of the most basic concepts described in the BGB...
And...the only rebuttal...
insaniak wrote:It would be less pathetic if it actually had any bearing on the argument.
Wow. Just, wow. I don't think I can respond to this. It's impossible to have a debate about RAW with someone who has no idea what the term means...
|
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2008/02/27 16:28:03
Ba-zziiing!
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2008/02/27 16:52:29
Subject: Neural Shredder--Continued from "INAT_FAQ" thread in News and Rumors
|
 |
Widowmaker
|
You're really just trolling. All sides of the rules debate have been presented, 3 people thinking they are right have declared victory with different positions.
Some people are more willing to see the differences than others, and some just pump their fists and yell 'Idiots!'. Your spot in the latter category makes you a troll.
If you want to have a serious discussion about it: try forming your argument in a way that only uses the rules and doesn't automatically deride anyone who disagrees with your interpretation.
I won't hold my breath.
|
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2008/02/27 16:53:32
Subject: Neural Shredder--Continued from "INAT_FAQ" thread in News and Rumors
|
 |
Homicidal Veteran Blood Angel Assault Marine
|
The other thread was locked by the time I looked at it. Since I can see how both sides can argue their point I only want to submit a rebuttal against the S X can't cause instant death since there's no strength listed. Using your arguement as worded, I would then presume that you would say Tyranid weapons cannot cause instant death since their strength values are listed as S+1 or S or S-2 and not an actual numerical value. I don't know anyone that doesn't allow ID from 'nid weapons...
|
I play
I will magnetize (now doing LED as well) your models for you, send me a DM!
My gallery images show some of my work
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2008/02/27 18:36:58
Subject: Neural Shredder--Continued from "INAT_FAQ" thread in News and Rumors
|
 |
[DCM]
Sentient OverBear
|
I think I may have mis-stated what I meant in the INAT_FAQ thread. When I said, "Continue this discussion", I meant "lay out all the arguments in a logical manner" and not "selectively quote and declare victory".
So, let's try this again from the top. And the Ad Hominem attacks are not helping you convince anyone, ColonelEllios.
|
DQ:70S++G+++M+B++I+Pw40k94+ID+++A++/sWD178R+++T(I)DM+++
Trust me, no matter what damage they have the potential to do, single-shot weapons always flatter to deceive in 40k. Rule #1 - BBAP
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2008/02/27 18:39:59
Subject: Neural Shredder--Continued from "INAT_FAQ" thread in News and Rumors
|
 |
Longtime Dakkanaut
|
Where's Flavius when you need him?
Capt K
|
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2008/02/27 19:35:17
Subject: Neural Shredder--Continued from "INAT_FAQ" thread in News and Rumors
|
 |
Dakka Veteran
|
Who have I attacked? I am not being blatantly offensive, nor do I need to be offensive at all.
Is it not pathetic that a very basic concept from the BGB had to be rolled out and presented to those who don't wish to follow the rules?
And as for Iorek's input...unless you wanted me to quote the whole thread and every post therein (which, BTW, is why I made it clear that this is from the old thread in News&Rumors, which anyone can search for), this is precisely where the discussion was cut off.
I haven't called anyone "idiotic." I haven't even implied it. I've derided those arguments that fail to make use of the relevant rules. That's a part of debate.
So perhaps all you super-sensitive reactionary types simply shouldn't bother responding to posts? It's evident that you seem to think any rational discourse is an "attack" of some sort. I'm sorry for you.
As far as Lormax's responce: The Tyranid weapons still work off of the "strength characteristic" rules in the BGB, it's just that the weapon's strength is dependent upon the creature's. This doesn't exempt Tyranid weapons from the normal shooting rules, because the weapons still end up with an actual "strength" value. "Strength X" is outside of this consideration, and furthermore, the NS rules are far more specific and have their own mechanism of operation, and aren't dependent upon the normal "determine wounds" and "remove casualties [read: instant death]" rules that Tyranid weapons remain dependent upon.
|
This message was edited 3 times. Last update was at 2008/02/27 19:41:45
Ba-zziiing!
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2008/02/27 19:41:31
Subject: Neural Shredder--Continued from "INAT_FAQ" thread in News and Rumors
|
 |
Widowmaker
|
Dear troll: Please post your suggested conclusion and the premises that support it.
|
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2008/02/27 00:05:02
Subject: Neural Shredder--Continued from "INAT_FAQ" thread in News and Rumors
|
 |
Dakka Veteran
|
Now who's trolling? Stop trying to get this thread locked because it actually includes a relevant rule that your argument didn't...
|
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2008/02/27 19:42:35
Ba-zziiing!
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2008/02/27 19:44:01
Subject: Neural Shredder--Continued from "INAT_FAQ" thread in News and Rumors
|
 |
Widowmaker
|
If my asking you to explain your position in a manner that can be debated is trolling, well then I guess I'm trolling.
|
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2008/02/27 19:46:05
Subject: Neural Shredder--Continued from "INAT_FAQ" thread in News and Rumors
|
 |
Homicidal Veteran Blood Angel Assault Marine
|
ColonelEllios wrote:As far as Lormax's responce: The Tyranid weapons still work off of the "strength characteristic" rules in the BGB, it's just that the weapon's strength is dependent upon the creature's. This doesn't exempt Tyranid weapons from the normal shooting rules, because the weapons still end up with an actual "strength" value. "Strength X" is outside of this consideration, and furthermore, the NS rules are far more specific and have their own mechanism of operation, and aren't dependent upon the normal "determine wounds" and "remove casualties" rules that Tyranid weapons remain dependent upon.
This is the response that I pretty much expected. So I'd like to quote you.
ColonelEllios wrote:1) The fact that the actual weapon profile for the NS has "S X" listed is in fact important. This weapon doesn't have a strength value listed in its profile, and should therefore immediately be disassociated with Instant Death, but I'm sure this won't be enough for you so I'll continue...
Using your quote above, it's safe to say the 'nid weapons don't have a str value in their profile either. You're contradicting yourself here. The description of 'nid weapons tell you how to determine the strength of the weapon. The description of the shredder tells you how to determine its strength as well. Where's the difference?
|
I play
I will magnetize (now doing LED as well) your models for you, send me a DM!
My gallery images show some of my work
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2008/02/27 20:31:18
Subject: Neural Shredder--Continued from "INAT_FAQ" thread in News and Rumors
|
 |
Widowmaker
|
Elaborating on Lormax's position here, this is where I would take it.
Since the books don't tell us what X is, we can define it by elimination from other terms:
P1 X in the STR Characteristic can represent 'Null (works in exception to the strength rules)' or 'Variable'
P2 '-' is used for 'Null' (Case: Sniper rifles, stinger pistol)
P3 (Assumption) each meaning will be represented by one character. Null will not be represented both by '-' and X.
C1 'X' is used as a variable
P4 When fired on a non-vehicle, the Neural shredder is Strength 8.
P5 When fired on a vehicle, the Neural shredder is Strength Null.
C2 Str X for the Neural shredder is 8 or Null dependent on target.
P6 The neural shredder uses Leadership instead of toughness to wound.
P7 The instant death rule takes place after a wound has been allocated by a weapon with strength double the targets toughness.
C3 The Neural shredder causes instant death on non-vehicle models wounded with Toughness 4 or less.
A few things that can support or refute this:
Can anyone check the weapon characteristic of Toxin mines for tyranids? I don't have that one handy. That weapon uses Str = Toughness of the target. If it is X on the summary sheet, we've pretty much nailed P3.
You can refute P3 if you can find a weapon without a strength value that uses X. Or you can add more possible terms to P1 in order to invalidate the definition by elimination.
P4 is possible to attack since the shredder is Strength 8 strictly for the purposes of wounding. If a weapon wounds with Str 8, is it then considered Str 8?
P7 is possible to attack and argue that Instant death is part of the wounding process, and would therefore continue with the leadership in place of the toughness for modifying the instant death procedure as well (continue using leadership instead of toughness). This is the route the INAT_FAQ went and it is certainly more conservative than my C3.
There are probably other routes you could take this. Or hey you could just insult me too, that proves a point!
|
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2008/02/27 21:21:59
Subject: Neural Shredder--Continued from "INAT_FAQ" thread in News and Rumors
|
 |
[DCM]
Tilter at Windmills
|
EXALT!
|
Adepticon 2015: Team Tourney Best Imperial Team- Team Ironguts, Adepticon 2014: Team Tourney 6th/120, Best Imperial Team- Cold Steel Mercs 2, 40k Championship Qualifier ~25/226
More 2010-2014 GT/Major RTT Record (W/L/D) -- CSM: 78-20-9 // SW: 8-1-2 (Golden Ticket with SW), BA: 29-9-4 6th Ed GT & RTT Record (W/L/D) -- CSM: 36-12-2 // BA: 11-4-1 // SW: 1-1-1
DT:70S++++G(FAQ)M++B++I+Pw40k99#+D+++A+++/sWD105R+++T(T)DM+++++
A better way to score Sportsmanship in tournaments
The 40K Rulebook & Codex FAQs. You should have these bookmarked if you play this game.
The Dakka Dakka Forum Rules You agreed to abide by these when you signed up.
Maelstrom's Edge! |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2008/02/27 21:51:19
Subject: Neural Shredder--Continued from "INAT_FAQ" thread in News and Rumors
|
 |
Phanobi
|
What's great about Moz is that he'll post the possible rebuttals to his own arguments. I propose that for all possible rules questions we just post and then let Moz argue with himself and come to a conclusion. By doing this we remove all excess posts from people who have no idea what they are talking about and just feel like being condescending.
Ozymandias, King of Kings
|
My name is Ozymandias, King of Kings. Look on My works, Ye Mighty, and despair.
Chris Gohlinghorst wrote:Holy Space Marine on a Stick.
This conversation has even begun to boggle my internet-hardened mind.
A More Wretched Hive of Scum and Villainy |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2008/02/27 21:52:20
Subject: Neural Shredder--Continued from "INAT_FAQ" thread in News and Rumors
|
 |
Homicidal Veteran Blood Angel Assault Marine
|
Who ends up correct then?
|
I play
I will magnetize (now doing LED as well) your models for you, send me a DM!
My gallery images show some of my work
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2008/02/27 21:59:47
Subject: Neural Shredder--Continued from "INAT_FAQ" thread in News and Rumors
|
 |
Phanobi
|
I don't know but we'd all win.
Ozymandias, King of Kings
|
My name is Ozymandias, King of Kings. Look on My works, Ye Mighty, and despair.
Chris Gohlinghorst wrote:Holy Space Marine on a Stick.
This conversation has even begun to boggle my internet-hardened mind.
A More Wretched Hive of Scum and Villainy |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2008/02/27 22:27:53
Subject: Neural Shredder--Continued from "INAT_FAQ" thread in News and Rumors
|
 |
Dakka Veteran
|
Curses! Double post.
|
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2008/02/27 22:29:33
Ba-zziiing!
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2008/02/27 22:29:14
Subject: Neural Shredder--Continued from "INAT_FAQ" thread in News and Rumors
|
 |
Dakka Veteran
|
moz wrote:P4 When fired on a non-vehicle, the Neural shredder is Strength 8.
You've made exactly the same error as insaniak here:
colonelellios wrote:
insaniak wrote:The fact that the rules entry lists the weapon as having Strength 8 when rolling to wound means that the Strength 'X' listed in the profile is completely irrelevant for ID purposes.
Really? That's very interesting, considering that the NS rules don't mention "strength 8 when rolling to wound," but rather state, "rather than using the target's toughness value." That's your answer right there. The rule tells you that the weapon doesn't affect toughness. You're not rolling to wound against toughness. There's no other reasonable way to interpret that.
You're confusing the fact that the weapon says "the NS is strength 8 but, rather than using the target's toughness value their leadership is used..." with "the NS is strength 8" [out of context]. You are making the mistake, again, of taking a clause of a rule completely out of context. The weapon is not "strength 8." The weapon is "strength X, and the NS is strength 8 but, rather than using the target's toughness value their leadership is used..." Sorry, but you don't get to pick and choose the bits of a rule you like while ignoring the rest.
Secondly, P3 is a terrible assumption to make because there are several weapons (such as wraithcannon) that use "S X" and do not have a strength of any sort described by their rules.
Additionally, there's no period after "The neural shredder is strength 8..." It's not a rule. It's only a rule when taken as a whole sentence. Furthermore, it comes after the specific exception: "Roll to wounds as follows:" That phrase, in conjunction with the "S X" in the weapon profile, is the proof that you are working in exception to the main rules.
______________________________________
To respond to Lormax:
With tyranid weapons, you still end up with a strength. What's the strength of a venomcannon? "Well...uh...S+2, so S 8 on my Hive Tyrant." What's the strength of a Neural Shredder? "Strength 8, but rather than using the targets toughness values their leadership is used." S + or - is not the same as "S X". It's still referencing a strength value, and you still end up with a number for a "strength characteristic."
|
This message was edited 4 times. Last update was at 2008/02/27 22:35:04
Ba-zziiing!
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2008/02/27 22:39:29
Subject: Neural Shredder--Continued from "INAT_FAQ" thread in News and Rumors
|
 |
Homicidal Veteran Blood Angel Assault Marine
|
ColonelEllios wrote:To respond to Lormax: With tyranid weapons, you still end up with a strength. What's the strength of a venomcannon? "Well...uh...S+2, so S 8 on my Hive Tyrant." What's the strength of a Neural Shredder? "Strength 8, but rather than using the targets toughness values their leadership is used."
There's no period after "The neural shredder is strength 8..." It's not a rule. It's only a rule when taken as a whole sentence. Furthermore, it comes after the specific exception: "Roll to wounds as follows:" That phrase, in conjunction with the "S X" in the weapon profile, is the proof that you are working in exception to the main rules.
What color is my g/f's hair? It's brown, but it used to be blonde. Her hair is still brown. The ID rule doesn't say to use the characteristic that it wounded against. It only stipulates that the model is wounded. If the model is wounded, compare the strength to the toughness. Equal to or greater? Instant Death.
|
I play
I will magnetize (now doing LED as well) your models for you, send me a DM!
My gallery images show some of my work
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2008/02/27 22:41:37
Subject: Neural Shredder--Continued from "INAT_FAQ" thread in News and Rumors
|
 |
Longtime Dakkanaut
|
The thing is, as long as the shredder is strength 8, you have 'use leadership for toughness'.
So if the shredder is strength 8 for insta-kill purposes, the target is Toughness=leadership for the same purposes.
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2008/02/27 22:47:18
Subject: Neural Shredder--Continued from "INAT_FAQ" thread in News and Rumors
|
 |
[MOD]
Making Stuff
|
ColonelEllios wrote:That phrase, in conjunction with the "S X" in the weapon profile, is the proof that you are working in exception to the main rules.
So you keep saying. But you still haven't shown how that actually makes any difference whatsoever for ID.
The model was wounded. For the purposes of that wound, the weapon was Strength 8. ID says that if the model was wounded by something with a Strength at least double the model's Toughness, ID occurs.
The fact that the weapon uses it's own special rules that aren't the same as the normal rules is completely irrelevant. When it comes time to determine whether or not ID occurs, you simply look at the Strength of the wounding hit, and the Toughness of the model.
|
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2008/02/28 01:50:19
Subject: Neural Shredder--Continued from "INAT_FAQ" thread in News and Rumors
|
 |
Dakka Veteran
|
Do you like going around in circles? You certainly seem to.
The Neural Shredder isn't strength 8 unless it's being compared to enemy leadership. That's what the rule says.
You apparently missed this whole post, twice now:
colonelellios wrote:insaniak wrote:The fact that the rules entry lists the weapon as having Strength 8 when rolling to wound means that the Strength 'X' listed in the profile is completely irrelevant for ID purposes.
Really? That's very interesting, considering that the NS rules don't mention "strength 8 when rolling to wound," but rather state, "rather than using the target's toughness value." That's your answer right there. The rule tells you that the weapon doesn't affect toughness. You're not rolling to wound against toughness. There's no other reasonable way to interpret that.
You're confusing the fact that the weapon says "the NS is strength 8 but, rather than using the target's toughness value their leadership is used..." with "the NS is strength 8" [out of context]. You are making the mistake, again, of taking a clause of a rule completely out of context. The weapon is not "strength 8." The weapon is "strength X, and the NS is strength 8 but, rather than using the target's toughness value their leadership is used..." Sorry, but you don't get to pick and choose the bits of a rule you like while ignoring the rest.
Respond to that, or get lost.
|
Ba-zziiing!
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2008/02/28 02:11:30
Subject: Neural Shredder--Continued from "INAT_FAQ" thread in News and Rumors
|
 |
[MOD]
Making Stuff
|
Nope, haven't missed it. Just disregarded it as claiming that the NS entry stating that it is S8 doesn't actually mean that it inflicts a S8 hit is hardly a sound rules argument.
Here's a very simple question for you: If a T4 model is wounded by a Neural Shredder, what was the Strength of the wounding hit?
|
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2008/02/28 02:25:48
Subject: Neural Shredder--Continued from "INAT_FAQ" thread in News and Rumors
|
 |
Decrepit Dakkanaut
|
skyth wrote:The thing is, as long as the shredder is strength 8, you have 'use leadership for toughness'.
So if the shredder is strength 8 for insta-kill purposes, the target is Toughness=leadership for the same purposes.
Thank you.
Now, all we need to see are a bunch of multi-wound models with Ld4 (or worse).
|
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2008/02/28 03:24:21
Subject: Neural Shredder--Continued from "INAT_FAQ" thread in News and Rumors
|
 |
Widowmaker
|
Good find on the 4th ed eldar codex str X's. So Str X can mean that it is either special, or it could be a variable (in the eldar codex the variable is null). Back to the tyranid codex we have a lot of weapons that are Assault X. X being the number of attacks the creature has.
So saying that X cannot be a variable is wrong, the tyranid codex disproves that. Now, do we have any insight that defines X for the Witch-hunter codex / DH? Did anyone buy that silly wargear book, what does it say?
The line: "When rolling to wound..." does not seem like an exception to the idea that a weapon has a strength. It seems far more likely that it's telling you: "When not rolling against armor values". A lascannon is Str 9 when rolling to wound, it just is also Str 9 when rolling to penetrate armor.
And I'd have to agree with insaniak that even working in exception to the main rules. If it's a Str 8 hit against the Ld value of the model, it's still a Str 8 hit. If Ld replaces toughness for the entirety of the process, then sure just read ID and replace the word toughness with LD. That's how you have to handle wounding anyways.
For Ozzy: The good thing about this argument is that I'm only interested in an outcome, don't care which one it is.  For the purposes of arguing in favor of the INAT_FAQ, all I have to do is show that it's not obvious (I'm gonna call that one mission accomplished). If we drill down to a gray area, all the better imo.
I play inquisition, I like the Callidus, and I've never argued that her weapon instakills, but this is YMDC. We want the truth!
For JohnHwangDD: the only thing I could come up with is the basic ork weirdboy after being hit by Purgatus.
|
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2008/02/28 03:37:11
Subject: Re:Neural Shredder--Continued from "INAT_FAQ" thread in News and Rumors
|
 |
Longtime Dakkanaut
|
ColonelEllios -Do you like going around in circles? You certainly seem to.
Where is Mauleed when you need him?
Do you like being a special kind of rude? You certainly seem to.
Wow. Just, wow. I don't think I can respond to this. It's impossible to have a debate about RAW with someone who has no idea what the term means...
Or expect reasonable responses from somebody who is unaware/uncaring of posting rules on Dakka.
Has something bad happened to you over the last couple of weeks ColonelEllios? You seemed to have gotten a lot angrier.
As for this Gold...
Who have I attacked? I am not being blatantly offensive, nor do I need to be offensive at all.
Absolutely correct Sir. Your offensiveness knows no limitations or boundaries.....
Chill dude. May the Light of the Empie of Space shine on you.
|
"Dakkanaut" not "Dakkaite"
Only with Minatures, does size matter...
"Only the living collect a pension"Johannes VII
"If the ork codex and 5th were developed near the same time, any possible nerf will be pre-planned."-malfred
"I'd do it but the GW Website makes my eyes hurt. "Gwar
"That would be page 7 and a half. You find it by turning your rulebook on its side and slamming your head against it..." insaniak
MeanGreenStompa - The only chatbot I ever tried talking to insisted I take a stress pill and kept referring to me as Dave, despite my protestations.
insaniak "So, by 'serious question' you actually meant something entirely different? "
Frazzled[Mod] On Rule #1- No it literally means: be polite. If we wanted less work there would be no OT section.
Chowderhead - God no. If I said Pirates Honor, I would have had to kill him whether he won or lost. |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2008/02/28 15:14:13
Subject: Neural Shredder--Continued from "INAT_FAQ" thread in News and Rumors
|
 |
Regular Dakkanaut
|
Can someone make an argument that can convince me not to replace the model's toughness with it's LD value when checking for ID? I can't get over that one bit, and it makes me frustrated, because I am then inclined to agree with our local troll. Sigh...
*hugs ColonelEllios* cheer up, sunshine! ^^
|
And God said unto Abraham, "Take this mighty bolter, my son, and smite thy enemies from afar. Fear not, Emperor protects..er, I mean, well, youknowwhatImean." |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2008/02/28 17:52:02
Subject: Neural Shredder--Continued from "INAT_FAQ" thread in News and Rumors
|
 |
Dakka Veteran
|
**Takes a deep breath**
You know, I'm really not an a$$hat. I simply cannot abide people who refuse to use the entirety of the relevant rules, and like to take phrases of them and hold them up as RAW and somehow indicating some loophole in the rules.
The most important part of the NS rules entry is the phrase:
"Roll to wound as follows:"
To make my argument perfectly clear, despite the fact that very few others seem concerned about following this format:
P1: The Neural Shredder is listed as "S X."
C0: In all cases, this always means that the weapon uses its own special rules (there is no "S X" weapon that doesn't have its own special rules)
P2: as defined on P. 23 a weapon's "strength characteristic" stipulates that weapons have a listed strength based on their weapon profile.
C1: The NS has no strength characteristic.
C2: The NS has no "strength characteristic" because it is listed in its profile as "S X"
P3: The entry in the codex says "Roll to wound as follows..."
C3: You are rolling in a manner that is in exception to the normal "to wound" process
P4: Specific codex rules override the BGB
P5: The NS rules make no reference to I.D., and furthermore don't use the target's toughness.
C4: The NS excludes the use of the Instant Death and "Rolling to Wound" rules found in the BGB, because it is a codex-specific rule that works in exclusion to the BGB rules
P6: The NS states "the NS is strength 8, but rather than rolling to wound [normally]..."
C5: The NS cannot interact with I.D., because it has no "Strength characteristic (being X)," but instead it follows these rules, which must be taken completely: "the NS is strength 8, but rather than rolling to wound [normally]..."
|
This message was edited 3 times. Last update was at 2008/02/28 17:57:07
Ba-zziiing!
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2008/02/28 18:17:06
Subject: Neural Shredder--Continued from "INAT_FAQ" thread in News and Rumors
|
 |
Widowmaker
|
C1 and C2 are false *if* X is considered a variable, as it is clearly used in several cases. X could either mean null, as it does clearly in codex eldar, or variable as in codex tyranids.
C4 isn't sound in that there is no specific rule overriding the ID rules. Lets say, for arguments sake, it's a one wound model. You roll to wound as Neural shredder tells you to do and inflict a wound. Neural shredder doesn't tell you to remove models reduced to zero wounds as a casualty, so can we not use the BGB casualty rules? ID takes place, as casualty removal does, outside of the normal wounding process. Neural shredder would need to explicitly state that something does not occur in order to exclude it.
C5 is burdened with the logical problems of C2.
Edit: And I appreciate that you are presenting your argument in a debatable manner now. Thanks.
|
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2008/02/28 18:18:14
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2008/02/28 18:38:40
Subject: Neural Shredder--Continued from "INAT_FAQ" thread in News and Rumors
|
 |
Dakka Veteran
|
"X" is not variable. "X" is an indicator of special rules. It's neither "null" or "variable"
I'd agree with you if it wasn't for the fact that Tyranid weapons are listed as "S + or -". For simplicity's sake, "S X" is not equivalent to "S-1." "S-1" is variable. "S X" is something else entirely.
As far as C4, I think you might be missing my point. The Neural Shredder rules exclude instant death implicitly. Not only does the weapon not have a "strength characteristic," it clearly works in a fashion that is in exception to the main rules for "rolling to wound". You're still relying on the false assumption that the "neural shredder is strength 8..." by taking that phrase out of context.
Really, the argument is sealed by the fact that I.D. requires that a model is wounded by a weapon with double the model's toughness. "S X" doesn't indicate any strength value, and therefore excludes the use of Instant Death.
To turn P5 around a little bit, the NS rules would *have* to reference Instant Death in order for it to take any effect with this weapon. Since the special rules indicated by "S X" do not reference I.D., you don't have any basis for insinuating that it should be used. To say that another way, the only portions of the main rules reference by the weapon and therefore applicable to it are "flame template," "assault 1" and "ap 1." That's it. Other than that it's a specific codex rule that allows only what it specifically states.
EDIT: To further clarify; for Insaniak's interpretation to work, the weapon description would have to read: "The neural shredder is Strength 8. Roll to wound as follows:..." They actually state, however, "roll to wound as follows: The neural shredder is strength 8, but rather..."
Do you see the distinction?
|
This message was edited 6 times. Last update was at 2008/02/28 18:48:28
Ba-zziiing!
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2008/02/28 18:47:01
Subject: Neural Shredder--Continued from "INAT_FAQ" thread in News and Rumors
|
 |
Widowmaker
|
X is used throughout the tyranid codex for the number of shots a weapon gets. Where X is the number of attacks the firer has. In that case, it's clearly a variable (albeit one controlled by special rules).
Your interpretation is that Str X is essentially null, and the weapon is never actually assigned a Str value.
Mine is that Str X is 8 when rolling to wound, and null when rolling to penetrate armor.
|
|
|
 |
 |
|