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.

Ceann wrote:
Rad grenades are not grenades, rad grenades are the name of a wargear. The name of a wargear is not a rule.

Then they would be called Rad Grenades. They aren't. They are referred to as 'rad grenades'.

Word soup.

Show me the page that states wargear names are rules.

Ceann wrote:
Can you help me find the rules section for "nouns"?
What page is that on?

Are you admitting you cannot read at a grade school level here (nouns, verbs, adjectives, sentences, punctuation)? If you cannot read rules at a grade school level then you cannot participate in this discussion

Show me the page that states wargear names are rules.
Show me the page that states wargear names are rules.
Show me the page that states wargear names are rules.
Show me the page that states wargear names are rules.
Show me the page that states wargear names are rules.

You have gone from arguing, to word games, to personal insults.
You are losing this pretty badly huh?

Ceann wrote:
Word soup.

Show me the page that states wargear names are rules.

'grenade' is not a name. It's a defined and indexed term in the BRB.


You have no argument, Ceann.

rad grenade is in lower case, not in upper case. It's not a proper noun. You are required to use the 40k definition for 'grenade'.

This thread is over.

col_impact wrote:

Ceann wrote:
Word soup.

Show me the page that states wargear names are rules.

'grenade' is not a name. It's a defined and indexed term in the BRB.

You ignore the RAW, create rules under RAI assumptions without citing any RAW as evidence, and then lie passing them off as RAW.

Well the DATASHEET rules tell you what a units name is.
Then they tell you another section of the datasheet tells you the WARGEAR you are using. Not the grenade you are using. The WARGEAR you are using.

'grenade' is not a name? GW can name their things anything they want, in any manner they want. The datasheet shows us those names. The SECTIONS of the rules that those names are located tell us the rules for those things, the name does not.

Show me the page that states wargear names are rules.
Show me the page that states wargear names are rules.
Show me the page that states wargear names are rules.
Show me the page that states wargear names are rules.
Show me the page that states wargear names are rules.

 Brother Ramses wrote:

col_impact wrote:

Ceann wrote:
Word soup.

Show me the page that states wargear names are rules.

'grenade' is not a name. It's a defined and indexed term in the BRB.

You ignore the RAW, create rules under RAI assumptions without citing any RAW as evidence, and then lie passing them off as RAW.

My argument is all perfectly according to the Rules As Written.

'grenade' is not a proper noun and so is not a name. It's defined in the BRB. The Army List Entry rule allows us to access the BRB definition.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Ceann wrote:
Well the DATASHEET rules tell you what a units name is.
Then they tell you another section of the datasheet tells you the WARGEAR you are using. Not the grenade you are using. The WARGEAR you are using.

'grenade' is not a name? GW can name their things anything they want, in any manner they want. The datasheet shows us those names. The SECTIONS of the rules that those names are located tell us the rules for those things, the name does not.

'grenade' is not a name. It's a defined term in the BRB.

Oh no, he's gone into "perfectly properly accurate and allowable" mode.

Show me the page that states wargear names are rules.
By the way it also has to be in the Special Rules section.

You cannot answer this question so you forfeit.

Ceann wrote:
Oh no, he's gone into "perfectly properly accurate and allowable" mode.

Show me the page that states wargear names are rules.
By the way it also has to be in the Special Rules section.

You cannot answer this question so you forfeit.

'grenade' is not a name. It's not capitalized. You have no argument.

'grenade' is an indexed term in the BRB, just like 'turn', 'assault', 'weapon', etc.

'grenade' is not defined in the Codex so per Army List Entry rule I look to the BRB for the definition/rules.

col_impact wrote:

Ceann wrote:
Oh no, he's gone into "perfectly properly accurate and allowable" mode.

Show me the page that states wargear names are rules.
By the way it also has to be in the Special Rules section.

You cannot answer this question so you forfeit.

'grenade' is not a name. It's not capitalized. You have no argument.

'grenade' is an indexed term in the BRB, just like 'turn', 'assault', 'weapon', etc.

You ignore the RAW, create rules under RAI assumptions without citing any RAW as evidence, and then lie passing them off as RAW.

Well in the Special Wargear Section of the Codex:IA

It says "RAD GRENADES"
If I want to purchase this wargear I may.
The DATASHEET of an Xeno's Inqusitor who can purchase this wargear "RAD GRENADES" tells me what pages of the Codex:IA to consult for this wargear.

Sadly the BRB has no rule for index.

Show me the page that state wargear names are rules.
Show me the page that states index is a special rule.

Ceann wrote:
Well in the Special Wargear Section of the Codex:IA

It says "RAD GRENADES"
If I want to purchase this wargear I may.
The DATASHEET of an Xeno's Inqusitor who can purchase this wargear "RAD GRENADES" tells me what pages of the Codex:IA to consult for this wargear.

Sadly the BRB has no rule for index.

Show me the page that state wargear names are rules.
Show me the page that states index is a special rule.

The rule for rad grenade uses 'grenade'

"During a turn in which a unit equipped with rad grenades launches an assault, or is assaulted, the enemy unit(s) suffer a -1 penalty to their Toughness until the end of the phase (this does affect the victims’ Instant Death threshold)."

'grenade' is not capitalized so it is not part of the wargear name. In order to decipher what 'grenade' means in the game we are required to find the definition for 'grenade' in the BRB.

There is no rule for 'grenade' in the Imperial Agent codex so we are required to look for the definition in the BRB.

col_impact wrote:

Ceann wrote:
Well in the Special Wargear Section of the Codex:IA

It says "RAD GRENADES"
If I want to purchase this wargear I may.
The DATASHEET of an Xeno's Inqusitor who can purchase this wargear "RAD GRENADES" tells me what pages of the Codex:IA to consult for this wargear.

Sadly the BRB has no rule for index.

Show me the page that state wargear names are rules.
Show me the page that states index is a special rule.

The rule for rad grenade uses 'grenade'

"During a turn in which a unit equipped with rad grenades launches an assault, or is assaulted, the enemy unit(s) suffer a -1 penalty to their Toughness until the end of the phase (this does affect the victims’ Instant Death threshold)."

'grenade' is not capitalized so it is not part of the wargear name. In order to decipher what 'grenade' means in the game we are required to find the definition for 'grenade' in the BRB.

You ignore the RAW, create rules under RAI assumptions without citing any RAW as evidence, and then lie passing them off as RAW.

Show me the page that state wargear names are rules.
Show me the page that states index is a special rule.

Ceann wrote:
Show me the page that state wargear names are rules.
Show me the page that states index is a special rule.

Why are you talking about "wargear names"?




'grenade' is not capitalized so it is not part of some wargear name. 'Grenade' is a 40k defined term after 'rad'. In order to decipher what 'grenade' means in the game we are required to find the definition for 'grenade' in the BRB.

There is no rule for 'grenade' in the Imperial Agent codex so we are required to look for the definition in the BRB.

Well according to page 135 of codex: IA it is.

Show me the page that states "col_impact can determine the names of wargear"

col_impact wrote:

Ceann wrote:
Show me the page that state wargear names are rules.
Show me the page that states index is a special rule.

Why are you talking about "wargear names"?

Spoiler:

8. Wargear: This section details the weapons and equipment the models in the unit are armed with, many of which are described in more detail in the Appendix of this book. The cost for all the unit’s basic equipment is included in its points cost.

'grenade' is not capitalized so it is not part of some wargear name. 'Grenade' is a 40k defined term after 'rad'. In order to decipher what 'grenade' means in the game we are required to find the definition for 'grenade' in the BRB.

There is no rule for 'grenade' in the Imperial Agent codex so we are required to look for the definition in the BRB.

You ignore the RAW, create rules under RAI assumptions without citing any RAW as evidence, and then lie passing them off as RAW.

What is the profile for grenade col?
I can't find it.

BTW if you would stop brain hammering over "grenade" and actually looked at the weapons listed in the entire weapons section, none of them are capitalized.
chainfist, bolter, chainsword, combi-weapon, stub guns, heavy stubbers, shotguns, missile launchers
And none of them have index references. So I guess none of them exist because they aren't in the index right?
You are pursuing, yet another, flawed argument.
Can you discard this useless waste of time and proceed to a relevant topic?

Show me the page that states "col_impact can determine the names of wargear"
Show me the page that states "index" is a rule.

Ceann wrote:
Well according to page 135 of codex: IA it is.

Oh really? Where on that page does it say that?

I see a rule that says 'rad grenade'. It's not capitalized. So it's not a proper noun. 'Grenade' then refers to the BRB definition of the term.

If you actually looked at the weapons listed in the entire weapons section, none of them are capitalized.
chainfist, bolter, chainsword, combi-weapon, stub guns, heavy stubbers, shotguns, missile launchers
And none of them have index references. So I guess none of them exist because they aren't in the index right?
You are pursuing, yet another, flawed argument.
Can you discard this useless waste of time and proceed to a relevant topic?

Show me the page that states "col_impact can determine the names of wargear"
Show me the page that states "index" is a rule.

Ceann wrote:
Are you serious sir? Are you going "you know who" also?

Page 180

"A model can use SUCH A GRENADE as a MELEE WEAPON."
SUCH = A grenade being used against a vehicle, MC or emplacement as notated in the section above titled Vehicles, Gun Enplacements and MC's located IN THE GRENADES SECTION of the rules.
MELEE WEAPON = A MELEE WEAPON, the things we used in CC.
"but can only ever make one attack, regardless of the number of attacks on its profile or any bonuses.
"Different grenades have different takes when used in this manner, as explained below"

IN WHAT MANNER. AS A MELEE WEAPON, PAGE 180 in the GRENADE RULES.
What is explained below?
UNUSUAL GRENADES.
How do we know if we have an unusual grenade?
Because we are using it as a MELEE WEAPON, which is the manner described above where it told us it was explained below.

The above quote clearly existed.

The sentence, "Different grenades have different profiles when used in this manner, as explained in the Unusual Grenades box below." does not exist. I gave it as an example of when the break-out box is being referenced. I even stated that specifically when I presented it.

The actual phrase states, "Different grenades have different profiles when used in this manner, as explained below."

You are applying it to the break-out box called "Unusual Grenades". The quote does not reference the break-out the box, though, so you are applying things without instruction.

The, "as explained below" is referencing "a grenade (used) as a Melee Weapon", as per the sentence preceding it.

If a weapon has different profiles, why would it then be referring to a box which starts out, "Some grenades do not have a profile"? The only explanation is that the break-out box is a side note, not to be kept up with the standards surrounding it.

Even more so, "below" the paragraph which talks about using grenades as a Melee weapon, we do see Krak Grenades, Haywire Grenades, and Meltabombs which do have rules and profiles regarding their use in Assault. So therefore, that paragraph can only be talking about those grenades and Wargear like them.

The attribution of that last paragraph before Assault Grenades which ends, "as explained below" to be meaning the "Unusual Grenades" break-out box is therefore contradictory to the language in both paragraphs and completely ignoring the context of both.

Charistoph

We are off the whole unusual grenades thing, we are playing word soup now with our friend col.

You must have missed the part where I decided I would just assert codex authority over the basic rule of unusual grenades that is not located in the special rules section, so it is not a special rule.
I was holding off on making that point because I was trying to help people understand the difference between basic rules and special rules but "you know who" decided to participate.

Because it is not a special rule it does not take precedence over codex:IA.

If you would like to participate in word soup you can stick around.

Brother Ramses wrote:Nothing tells you to reference the rules for Grenades in the BRB in the Rad Grenades so therefore you do not. You are pigeon-holing it based on a naming convention aka fluff aka RAI with absolutely no RAW telling you to do so. As was pointed out, other Grenades are specific in telling you to reference the grenade rules in the BRB and said rules are written as such. However lacking no explicit direction to reference the grenade rules in the BRB, your stance that you do and in turn the subsequent stance on Unusual Grenades is pure RAI with no basis in RAW.

Why does anything tell me to reference anything? They are Grenades by name, do their rules tell you to reference them as differently?

Furthermore, it was not my original stance, but simply a supportive one.

If we went by Caenn's summation, then nothing break's the games rules, because special rules are basic rules in special rules. He doesn't even think that Unit Type rules break the basic game rules, after all.

 Charistoph wrote:

Ceann wrote:
Are you serious sir? Are you going "you know who" also?

Page 180

"A model can use SUCH A GRENADE as a MELEE WEAPON."
SUCH = A grenade being used against a vehicle, MC or emplacement as notated in the section above titled Vehicles, Gun Enplacements and MC's located IN THE GRENADES SECTION of the rules.
MELEE WEAPON = A MELEE WEAPON, the things we used in CC.
"but can only ever make one attack, regardless of the number of attacks on its profile or any bonuses.
"Different grenades have different takes when used in this manner, as explained below"

IN WHAT MANNER. AS A MELEE WEAPON, PAGE 180 in the GRENADE RULES.
What is explained below?
UNUSUAL GRENADES.
How do we know if we have an unusual grenade?
Because we are using it as a MELEE WEAPON, which is the manner described above where it told us it was explained below.

The above quote clearly existed.

The sentence, "Different grenades have different profiles when used in this manner, as explained in the Unusual Grenades box below." does not exist. I gave it as an example of when the break-out box is being referenced. I even stated that specifically when I presented it.

The actual phrase states, "Different grenades have different profiles when used in this manner, as explained below."

You are applying it to the break-out box called "Unusual Grenades". The quote does not reference the break-out the box, though, so you are applying things without instruction.

The, "as explained below" is referencing "a grenade (used) as a Melee Weapon", as per the sentence preceding it.

If a weapon has different profiles, why would it then be referring to a box which starts out, "Some grenades do not have a profile"? The only explanation is that the break-out box is a side note, not to be kept up with the standards surrounding it.

Even more so, "below" the paragraph which talks about using grenades as a Melee weapon, we do see Krak Grenades, Haywire Grenades, and Meltabombs which do have rules and profiles regarding their use in Assault. So therefore, that paragraph can only be talking about those grenades and Wargear like them.

The attribution of that last paragraph before Assault Grenades which ends, "as explained below" to be meaning the "Unusual Grenades" break-out box is therefore contradictory to the language in both paragraphs and completely ignoring the context of both.

Doesn't matter. Unlike a krak, frag, and melta that specifically tell you to reference the BRB, the wargear entry for rad grenades does no such thing. The Unusual Grenade stance/argument is a dead end because of this RAW.

Ceann wrote:
If you actually looked at the weapons listed in the entire weapons section, none of them are capitalized.
chainfist, bolter, chainsword, combi-weapon, stub guns, heavy stubbers, shotguns, missile launchers
And none of them have index references. So I guess none of them exist because they aren't in the index right?

Those are just listing of weapons.



'weapons' is a defined term in the BRB. Once you access that definition you will know to look for a profile. The Army List Entry rule allows you to look through whatever sources you need to find the profile.

Most of those weapons you listed have profiles in the BRB.

'grenade' is a indexed term in the BRB.

 Charistoph wrote:

Brother Ramses wrote:Nothing tells you to reference the rules for Grenades in the BRB in the Rad Grenades so therefore you do not. You are pigeon-holing it based on a naming convention aka fluff aka RAI with absolutely no RAW telling you to do so. As was pointed out, other Grenades are specific in telling you to reference the grenade rules in the BRB and said rules are written as such. However lacking no explicit direction to reference the grenade rules in the BRB, your stance that you do and in turn the subsequent stance on Unusual Grenades is pure RAI with no basis in RAW.

Why does anything tell me to reference anything? They are Grenades by name, do their rules tell you to reference them as differently?

Furthermore, it was not my original stance, but simply a supportive one.

If we went by Caenn's summation, then nothing break's the games rules, because special rules are basic rules in special rules. He doesn't even think that Unit Type rules break the basic game rules, after all.

I am sorry you feel this way.

Can you elaborate for me a circumstance where I am pursuing this "special rules are basic rules in special rules". I actually care about your understanding of the rules, compared to Word_Soup's shenanigans, he is looking to "win at any cost" not to be correct.

Ceann wrote:
Charistoph

We are off the whole unusual grenades thing, we are playing word soup now with our friend col.

You must have missed the part where I decided I would just assert codex authority over the basic rule of unusual grenades that is not located in the special rules section, so it is not a special rule.
I was holding off on making that point because I was trying to help people understand the difference between basic rules and special rules but "you know who" decided to participate.

Because it is not a special rule it does not take precedence over codex:IA.

If you would like to participate in word soup you can stick around.

I will address responses to me as I see fit. Admittedly, I did miss a couple pages over dinner and did not see them there when I went to respond.

But you are still vastly incorrect in thinking that Wargear do not carry special rules.

Wargear do carry special rules, but only when they are notated as having them. I do not assume they have them unless I am instructed that they have them. Such as on a weapon profile.

 Brother Ramses wrote:


Doesn't matter. Unlike a krak, frag, and melta that specifically tell you to reference the BRB, the wargear entry for rad grenades does no such thing. The Unusual Grenade stance/argument is a dead end because of this RAW.

No specific reference required.

Like 'weapon' or 'turn', 'grenade' is a defined and indexed term in the BRB.

Grenade would have to be capitalized as a proper noun for you to not automatically access the BRB provided definition.