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:

col_impact wrote:
Automatically Appended Next Post:

rigeld2 wrote:
You've failed to show conflict resolution. You just asserted what should happen with no evidence as to why (other than we should trust you?). You've also failed, repeatedly, to show why your timing argument is relevant. A rule is broken because of a decision. Why are you allowed to choose to break a rule there, but moving 7" with a Tac Squad is right out?

A rules conflct between sources happens AFTER the Deep Strike. Per the rules, we implement the Basic Vs Advanced Rule to resolve any conflict.

You continuously assert that the timing is relevant. It's not.
You continuously assert that BvA resolves the conflict. It doesn't.

You've failed to prove either assertion - you just repeat the same things over and over.

The issue revolves around one rule. A rule that has a conditional. The conditional gets triggered at a certain logical step in the game. What is that point in the game?

"If a Flying Monstrous Creature arrives via Deep Strike Reserve, it always counts as being in Swooping mode."

The BRB explicitly tells us how to resolve conflicts between sources.

"Where advanced rules apply to a specific model, they always override any contradicting basic rules."

So you are obtusely refusing to provide a step by step argument when a rule has a conditional and has a timing, and you are obtusely refusing to accept the plain Basic Versus Advanced Rule.

Since I am the only one who has advanced a step by step RAW argument so far, my RAW argument remains unchallenged.

Guys, feel free to actually participate here. I do have an open mind. But, you have to show step by step how the problem actually plays out in the game. I eagerly await your step by step arguments.

JinxDragon wrote:
Col_Impact,
What you have done to this thread is push it towards a curiosity I have raised a few times in the past:

We currently have permission to carry out action X
Outcome Y is always illegal, regardless of how it occurs
Action X will end up creating Y, at some point in the future
Can we complete action X?

Very few people have answered that question for me, I can't remember one doing so directly, but the general consensus is: No.
There is a strong belief in a Fundamental Concept that dictates players must do everything in their power to avoid creating illegal outcomes. It is not a Rule as Written answer but it is one that you will find most players adhere to and why you are encountering so much resistance explaining this idea. Personally, the very fact that I am typing out these words is testimony to how poorly written these Rules are, for one would expect these Rules to have been previewed by an Editor to ensure one of their players can not 'crash the game' at a whim. Curious how the most problems with this concept all relate to Deep Strike....

As for Rule as Written, the problem still stems from applying Basic vs Advanced.
Basic vs Advanced does not grant us permission to ignore individual Clauses within a Rule, nor does it grant us permission to re-write a Rule in order to avoid the conflict. In this scenario, we end up loosing access to the Rule which grants us permission to choose a flight mode as that clause is found within the same Rule as the one creating the conflict. The next point in the time line where we are granted permission to choose a Flight Mode is when the Monster begins to Move, not even the start of the Movement Phase but the individual Model's Movement itself. This leaves us with a period where the Flying Monstrous Creature is in neither Flight Modes, which is also a violation of the Rule but one we can not resolve... we would need to create a Rule but we only have permission to remove Rules under Basic vs Advanced.

Lacking the ability to choose the correct Flight Mode at that point in time ensures we end up in a black hole because we can never select the Flight Mode required by the Restriction....

As for the other issues, such as selecting to Swoop when the choice is given?
Just much faster trip into the black hole, it is only when you choose the option that does not create the conflict that you by-pass the issue entirely.

First of all thanks for actually engaging in the discussion. I hope others follow suit.

Sounds like here you are using Basic Vs Advanced to put the Flyrant into MC default. This works and clears any problems. I am not seeing the black hole here. It steps through the problem and clears the contradiction. If you still see a black hole, could you elaborate more on what that black hole is exactly? In fact, if you read the FMC stuff about Flight Modes you should note that there is a regular gap between the end of the turn and the start of the movement phase when no Flight Mode is selected.

The Flyrant deep strikes in and moves as a MC until the next movement phase. Since it doesn't get to move any further the turn it Deep Strikes in, the only significance is losing hard to hit and jink until the next movement phase.

Also, it sounds like you are appealing to some Fundamental Concept that is not written in the game. I don't mind the inclusion of such discussion but we are straying outside of RAW, agreed?

Further, it sounds like you are agreeing with me that others have so far relied on a non-RAW concept (the Fundamental Concepts) to try to undermine my RAW argument.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

We currently have permission to carry out action X
Outcome Y is always illegal, regardless of how it occurs
Action X will end up creating Y, at some point in the future
Can we complete action X?

The rules could have provided us with a way to step back through steps until we reach a clean game state. That is certainly a possible thing to have in the BRB.

But the rules don't provide that way. When you get to Y, you clear away the rules conflict with the BvA hammer, since in this particular case it is indeed a conflict arising out of divergent sources. If we didn't have divergent sources we would not have the BvA hammer.

Keep in mind that there is nothing illegal happening per se, just a conflict that arises between sources where the player is told contradicting things.

col_impact wrote:
[
Guys, feel free to actually participate here. I do have an open mind. But, you have to show step by step how the problem actually plays out in the game. I eagerly await your step by step arguments.

.

Pure Troll, right here. You have been shown that your wrong, but continue to make statements like this and copy/paste your incorrect answer. You have nothing.

Fragile wrote:

col_impact wrote:
[
Guys, feel free to actually participate here. I do have an open mind. But, you have to show step by step how the problem actually plays out in the game. I eagerly await your step by step arguments.

.

Pure Troll, right here. You have been shown that your wrong, but continue to make statements like this and copy/paste your incorrect answer. You have nothing.

Fragile, I suggest you look at JinxDragon's post and follow his example. He has actually accepted the challenge to work through step by step and his post brings up several things to discuss which your obtuseness is refusing to discuss.

He points out that you are relying on some Fundamental Concept that isn't in the BRB to try to undermine my RAW argument.

Col_Impact,
The Model has a Rule stating it can only use Gliding Flight Mode.
What method of movement is it using to arrive on the battlefield?

col_impact wrote:

Fragile wrote:

col_impact wrote:
[
Guys, feel free to actually participate here. I do have an open mind. But, you have to show step by step how the problem actually plays out in the game. I eagerly await your step by step arguments.

.

Pure Troll, right here. You have been shown that your wrong, but continue to make statements like this and copy/paste your incorrect answer. You have nothing.

Fragile, I suggest you look at JinxDragon's post and follow his example. He has actually accepted the challenge to work through step by step and his post brings up several things to discuss which your obtuseness is refusing to discuss.

He points out that you are relying on some Fundamental Concept that isn't in the BRB to try to undermine my RAW argument.

I need do nothing more than I already have done. I have disproven your theory pages ago. Yet you ignore it and refuse to debate any points that have been brought up. The core of the rule set is that restrictions trump permission unless you have a specific exception. MF stating you cannot Swoop trumps your Deep Strike and FMC rules. You admit is yourself in previous posts and then claim there is no conflict.

JinxDragon wrote:
Col_Impact,
The Model has a Rule stating it can only use Gliding Flight Mode.
What method of movement is it using to arrive on the battlefield?

It arrives on the battlefield with Deep Strike. Indeed it is only after arrival by Deep Strike that the FMC rule kicks in to apply swooping which then gets hammered by BvA.

A FMC regularly has periods of time each turn between the beginning of the turn and the movement phase where no Flight Mode is selected. The Deep Strike occurs in a similar window where no Flight Mode is selected.







Automatically Appended Next Post:

Fragile wrote:

col_impact wrote:

Fragile wrote:

col_impact wrote:
[
Guys, feel free to actually participate here. I do have an open mind. But, you have to show step by step how the problem actually plays out in the game. I eagerly await your step by step arguments.

.

Pure Troll, right here. You have been shown that your wrong, but continue to make statements like this and copy/paste your incorrect answer. You have nothing.

Fragile, I suggest you look at JinxDragon's post and follow his example. He has actually accepted the challenge to work through step by step and his post brings up several things to discuss which your obtuseness is refusing to discuss.

He points out that you are relying on some Fundamental Concept that isn't in the BRB to try to undermine my RAW argument.

I need do nothing more than I already have done. I have disproven your theory pages ago. Yet you ignore it and refuse to debate any points that have been brought up. The core of the rule set is that restrictions trump permission unless you have a specific exception. MF stating you cannot Swoop trumps your Deep Strike and FMC rules. You admit is yourself in previous posts and then claim there is no conflict.

You have yet to sit down and resolve what you are claiming in a logical step by step fashion. And, when you do, make sure to take careful note of when the conditional rules in question get applied.

I will have to research your new point more, the period between the End of Turn and their next movement, but even if there is a period where they do not have a flight mode....
Why does that matter from a strict Rule as Written point of view?

The Restriction in question states the Model can only make use of the Gliding Mode
This conflict allows it to remove the 'must zoom' from the equation, but still does not replace it with 'may/must glide'
The Model has Arrived that turn, so it has moved / deployed onto the field
This Movement / Deployment did not involve using Gliding Mode
Therefore it has not met the requirement to only use Gliding Mode....

JinxDragon wrote:
I will have to research your new point more, the period between the End of Turn and their next movement, but even if there is a period where they do not have a flight mode....
Why does that matter from a strict Rule as Written point of view?

The Rule states they can only use the Gliding Mode, so using anything other then Glide Mode is illegal.
Therefore this Model, Arriving by Deep Strike without Zooming as part of the process, still has not met the requirement to only use Gliding Mode as it is not Gliding....

There are two Flight Modes in the game. Swooping and Gliding. The rule is that the Flyrant "can only use the Gliding Flight Mode", meaning it cannot use the Swooping Flight Mode or any other yet to be made up Flight Mode.

The rule does not state "can only move using the Gliding Flight Mode." There is an important logical distinction between that statement and "can only use the Gliding Flight Mode."

Deep Strike does not require the use of a Flight Mode.

The Hive Tyrant cannot leave the unit during the battle, and can only use the Gliding flight mode.

While you are right it doesn't say 'while moving,' from a strict Rule as Written point of view it would mean this Model can not use any Rule bar the Gliding Flight Mode. Seeing as that is clearly not a correct reading of this Rule, I think it is reasonable that we conclude the restriction stating the Model can only use the Gliding flight mode is directly in relation to Movement itself. The Model still has permission to do other things, but whenever it encounters a Rule which would require it to move in fashion that is not Gliding then it looses access to that Rule.

So I ask again:
If you have moved / deployed in a way which does not make use of the Gliding Mode, are you using only the Gliding Mode?

JinxDragon wrote:
The Hive Tyrant cannot leave the unit during the battle, and can only use the Gliding flight mode.

While you are right it doesn't say 'while moving,' from a strict Rule as Written point of view it would mean this Model can not use any Rule bar the Gliding Flight Mode. Seeing as that is clearly not a correct reading of this Rule, I think it is reasonable that we conclude the restriction stating the Model can only use the Gliding flight mode is directly in relation to Movement itself. The Model still has permission to do other things, but whenever it encounters a Rule which would require it to move in fashion that is not Gliding then it looses access to that Rule.

So I ask again:
If you have moved / deployed in a way which does not make use of the Gliding Mode, are you using only the Gliding Mode?

Logic.

The rule does not say "can only move using the Gliding Flight Mode."

It says "can only use the Gliding Flight Mode"

From a strict RAW read it means it can only use the Gliding Flight Mode and not some non-Gliding Flight Mode.

Deep Strike itself does not involve using any Flight Mode. So yes it has not violated any rule since it has not used a non-Gliding Flight Mode.

When I Deep Strike, have I used any Flight Mode? In fact, for the non-Flyrant FMC, a Flight Mode is assigned after the Deep Strike, when the FMC arrives with Deep Strike.

Logic is not a Rule as Written answer, and you wanted to keep this to just the Rules as they are Written correct?
That sentence, as written and applied without context would prevent us from using any Rule which is not named Gliding Mode.

If you want to state there is a context to the Rule then I will point out again that the context has to be in line with the way the Rule is normally used. Flight Modes, of any type, are an alternative method of Movement that the Model has access to, so it is easy to state that the 'logical context' of this Rule has to involve movement. Therefore, this Restriction prevents the Model from accessing any Movement Type which is not the one listed within the Rule. If they do move via any other method they have violated this rule, as they can not honestly state they have only used the Gliding Flight Mode.

They have use Gliding + however they Moved prior....

JinxDragon wrote:
Logic is not a Rule as Written answer, and you wanted to keep this to just the Rules as they are Written correct?
That sentence, as written and applied without context would prevent us from using any Rule which is not named Gliding Mode.

If you want to state there is a context to the Rule then I will point out again that the context has to be in line with the way the Rule is normally used. Flight Modes, of any type, are an alternative method of Movement that the Model has access to, so it is easy to state that the 'logical context' of this Rule has to involve movement. Therefore, this Restriction prevents the Model from accessing any Movement Type which is not the one listed within the Rule. If they do move via any other method they have violated this rule, as they can not honestly state they have only used the Gliding Flight Mode.

They have use Gliding + however they Moved prior....

I was pointing out that there was a logical problem with what you are saying.

I am claiming RAW.

From a strict RAW read it means it can only use the Gliding Flight Mode and not some non-Gliding Flight Mode.


You are committing the logical fallacy of conflation.

You are conflating these two different statements

"can only move using the Gliding Flight Mode."

"can only use the Gliding Flight Mode"


You are not permitted to throw in a "while moving" to the rule in some appeal to context. That is reading into the rule.

As long as I do not use some non-Gliding Flight Mode I have literally satisfied the rule.

col_impact wrote:
[
You are not permitted to throw in a "while moving" to the rule in some appeal to context. That is reading into the rule.

As long as I do not use some non-Gliding Flight Mode I have literally satisfied the rule.

Which is violated by Swooping when Deep Striking. You cannot escape that.

Fragile wrote:

col_impact wrote:
[
You are not permitted to throw in a "while moving" to the rule in some appeal to context. That is reading into the rule.

As long as I do not use some non-Gliding Flight Mode I have literally satisfied the rule.

Which is violated by Swooping when Deep Striking. You cannot escape that.

The Deep Strike itself does not involve a Flight Mode. After the Deep Strike a Flight Mode is assigned by the FMC which conflicts with the MF rule. BvA resolves that conflict per the rules.

Also, please follow along with the actual conversation we are having at this point. BvA has been applied at this point in our discussion and we are sorting out whether there is a black hole.

col_impact wrote:

Fragile wrote:

col_impact wrote:
[
You are not permitted to throw in a "while moving" to the rule in some appeal to context. That is reading into the rule.

As long as I do not use some non-Gliding Flight Mode I have literally satisfied the rule.

Which is violated by Swooping when Deep Striking. You cannot escape that.

The Deep Strike itself does not involve a Flight Mode. After the Deep Strike a Flight Mode is assigned by the FMC which conflicts with the MF rule. BvA resolves that conflict per the rules.

Also, please follow along with the actual conversation we are having at this point. BvA has been applied at this point in our discussion and we are sorting out whether there is a black hole.

(Emphasis mine)

Stop stating the underlined, it is not true at all.

 DeathReaper wrote:

col_impact wrote:

Fragile wrote:

col_impact wrote:
[
You are not permitted to throw in a "while moving" to the rule in some appeal to context. That is reading into the rule.

As long as I do not use some non-Gliding Flight Mode I have literally satisfied the rule.

Which is violated by Swooping when Deep Striking. You cannot escape that.

The Deep Strike itself does not involve a Flight Mode. After the Deep Strike a Flight Mode is assigned by the FMC which conflicts with the MF rule. BvA resolves that conflict per the rules.

Also, please follow along with the actual conversation we are having at this point. BvA has been applied at this point in our discussion and we are sorting out whether there is a black hole.

(Emphasis mine)

Stop stating the underlined, it is not true at all.

I keep stating it because it is true. The BvA is what the BRB provides as a way to resolve conflicts between sources.

You seem only obtuse in your insistence that I cannot use it. Feel free to work your way step by step through the logic of your counter argument. Obtuse declarations do not belong in this thread. Follow JinxDragon's example and actually start working through the rules.

Col_Impact,
You are reading into the Rule as well, by creating a context which limits this Restriction to just the Glide and Zooming Flight Modes.
The wording is "can only use the Gliding flight mode" so, if we go by a strict Rule as Written, the Model is forbidden from using any Rule which is not named 'Gliding Flight Mode.'

Should we be able to inject any sort of context into this Rule Debate, I am going to keep pointing out that the context of Flight Modes involve movement.

JinxDragon wrote:
Col_Impact,
You are reading into the Rule as well, by creating a context which limits this Restriction to just the Glide and Zooming Flight Modes.
The wording is can only use the Gliding flight mode so, if we go by a strict Rule as Written, the Model is forbidden from using any Rule which is not named 'Gliding Flight Mode.'

If we are going to start injecting context I am going to keep pointing out that Flight Modes are a form of Movement so any Movement will fall under that context.

I am not reading into the rule.

Your appeal to some hyper-literal reading of the rule "the Model is forbidden from using any Rule which is not named 'Gliding Flight Mode'" as a way to give you permission to squeeze in "to move" and say it's a literal read is an abuse of logic. I don't think a single game of 40k could be played if we allowed that kind of logic abuse to happen.

col_impact wrote:
I keep stating it because it is true. The BvA is what the BRB provides as a way to resolve conflicts between sources.

You seem only obtuse in your insistence that I cannot use it. Feel free to work your way step by step through the logic of your counter argument. Obtuse declarations do not belong in this thread. Follow JinxDragon's example and actually start working through the rules.

It is not true.

There is no conflict, there are two restrictions. (You have to follow both restrictions).

A conflict is a restriction and an allowance (Like Snap shots and markerlights).

So Stop saying BvA applies, It does not.

 DeathReaper wrote:

col_impact wrote:
I keep stating it because it is true. The BvA is what the BRB provides as a way to resolve conflicts between sources.

You seem only obtuse in your insistence that I cannot use it. Feel free to work your way step by step through the logic of your counter argument. Obtuse declarations do not belong in this thread. Follow JinxDragon's example and actually start working through the rules.

It is not true.

There is no conflict, there are two restrictions. (You have to follow both restrictions).

A conflict is a restriction and an allowance (Like Snap shots and markerlights).

So Stop saying BvA applies, It does not.

BvA is empowered to deal with ANY CONTRADICTING basic rules.

col_impact wrote:

 DeathReaper wrote:

col_impact wrote:
I keep stating it because it is true. The BvA is what the BRB provides as a way to resolve conflicts between sources.

You seem only obtuse in your insistence that I cannot use it. Feel free to work your way step by step through the logic of your counter argument. Obtuse declarations do not belong in this thread. Follow JinxDragon's example and actually start working through the rules.

It is not true.

There is no conflict, there are two restrictions. (You have to follow both restrictions).

A conflict is a restriction and an allowance (Like Snap shots and markerlights).

So Stop saying BvA applies, It does not.

Spoiler:

Where advanced rules apply to a specific model, they always override any contradicting basic rules.

BvA is empowered to deal with ANY CONTRADICTING basic rules.

There are two restrictions, there is no contradiction, you can follow both restrictions just fine.

 DeathReaper wrote:

col_impact wrote:

 DeathReaper wrote:

col_impact wrote:
I keep stating it because it is true. The BvA is what the BRB provides as a way to resolve conflicts between sources.

You seem only obtuse in your insistence that I cannot use it. Feel free to work your way step by step through the logic of your counter argument. Obtuse declarations do not belong in this thread. Follow JinxDragon's example and actually start working through the rules.

It is not true.

There is no conflict, there are two restrictions. (You have to follow both restrictions).

A conflict is a restriction and an allowance (Like Snap shots and markerlights).

So Stop saying BvA applies, It does not.

Spoiler:

Where advanced rules apply to a specific model, they always override any contradicting basic rules.

BvA is empowered to deal with ANY CONTRADICTING basic rules.

There are two restrictions, there is no contradiction, you can follow both restrictions just fine.

There is a basic rule that puts it in Swooping Mode. There is an advanced rule that says "can only use Gliding Flight Mode". Those rules give the player contradicting instructions.

Believe the very literal reading is dishonest if you wish, but you are the one wanting to leave this in the realm of 'Pure Rule as Written' with no context for the Rule.
If we are to entertain the possibility that the Restriction in question contains limits not written into the Rule itself, then we have to look into what Flight Modes actually do and use that as part of the context. This means we still encounter the problem of the Model being in an 'illegal configuration' whenever it is in a situation where no flight mode is selected. As the Restriction specifically mentions we can only do something, any time we complete an action which is covered by the Rule but do not use that particular Rule we have violated such a Restriction.

As I keep asking:
If you Deep Strike and are not Gliding, have you used only Glide?

JinxDragon wrote:
Believe the very literal reading is dishonest if you wish, but you are the one wanting to leave this in the realm of 'Pure Rule as Written.'

I am just saying that your position on that point is simply not tenable. Slipping in "to move" in the rule would take us off a RAW discussion whether you want to admit it or not. The Pure Rule as Written argument is a strawman argument if there ever was one. I have always offered just a RAW one.

There is simply a difference between

"can only use the Gliding Flight Mode"

"can only move using the Gliding Flight Mode"

If you want to rest your whole counter-argument on conflating those two statements, then you are committing an easy to spot logical fallacy and semantic fault to do so.

Is that the only black hole you are talking about, the one that comes from reading the rule as "can only move using the Gliding Flight Mode"?

col_impact wrote:
There is a basic rule that puts it in Swooping Mode. There is an advanced rule that says "can only use Gliding Flight Mode". Those rules give the player contradicting instructions.

They are not in conflict, you can adhere to both rules by not using deep strike.

If something "can only use Gliding Flight Mode" then it can not Deep Strike because Deep Strike requires the model be in Swooping mode after you deep strike.

So using the Deep Strike rule would force a rule to be broken, and as such can not be used.

Col_Impact,
I am simply going to leave it at that question:

If you Deep Strike and are did not Glide, have you used only the Gliding Flight Mode?

 DeathReaper wrote:

col_impact wrote:
There is a basic rule that puts it in Swooping Mode. There is an advanced rule that says "can only use Gliding Flight Mode". Those rules give the player contradicting instructions.

They are not in conflict, you can adhere to both rules by not using deep strike.

If something "can only use Gliding Flight Mode" then it can not Deep Strike because Deep Strike requires the model be in Swooping mode after you deep strike.

So using the Deep Strike rule would force a rule to be broken, and as such can not be used.

Nope. BvA allows

"can only use Gliding Flight Mode"

to hammer out

"If a Flying Monstrous Creature arrives via Deep Strike Reserve, it always counts as being in Swooping mode."

because instruction "can only use Gliding Flight Mode" contradicts instruction "counts as being in Swooping Mode" and the hammering falls under category ANY CONTRADICTION.

col_impact wrote:

JinxDragon wrote:
Believe the very literal reading is dishonest if you wish, but you are the one wanting to leave this in the realm of 'Pure Rule as Written.'

I am just saying that your position on that point is simply not tenable. Slipping in "to move" in the rule would take us off a RAW discussion whether you want to admit it or not. The Pure Rule as Written argument is a strawman argument if there ever was one. I have always offered just a RAW one.

There is simply a difference between

"can only use the Gliding Flight Mode"

"can only move using the Gliding Flight Mode"

If you want to rest your whole counter-argument on conflating those two statements, then you are committing an easy to spot logical fallacy and semantic fault to do so.

Is that the only black hole you are talking about, the one that comes from reading the rule as "can only move using the Gliding Flight Mode"?

There is no difference in those statements as regards to how they apply. Your logic is that you can break any rule in the game as long as you can find another rule giving you permission to do something at a later point in the events. Like firing Ordnance last on a vehicle to avoid the other weapons Snap Firing.

The entirety of your argument was that Swooping was "After the Fact." Now you are trying to create something new since that was shown incorrect. You are forbidden from Swooping. Therefore you cannot take any action that would make you Swooping, which DS does.

Your entire argument is an epic fail.

JinxDragon wrote:
Col_Impact,
I am simply going to leave it at that question:

If you Deep Strike and are did not Glide, have you used only the Gliding Flight Mode?

I have not broken the rule "can only use the Gliding Flight Mode"

Which would mean you used only the Gliding Flight Mode, correct?