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.

off topic:
Gwar! serves an interesting purpose on dakka. While he argues almost anything, and is wrong as often as he is right, by his arguing he irons out all the rules issues. Just this promotion of argument over rules helps to gain a higher understanding. Hes kinda like a prostate exam.

I'm with TopC on this one, turnabout's fair play.

Orkeosaurus wrote:I'm with TopC on this one, turnabout's fair play.

Not exactly why you feel the need to "deny" someone something it doesn't have anyway. RaW it affects units in Transports and RaW it has no Invulnerable Save. I fail to see how one would affect the other?

Sorry about this, but i had to make a phone call to GW customers service again. They explained that Doom is a special character name Zoanthrope and therefore bloody thing receives the 3++ invul save. End of story....people just stop reading everything so deeply.... this kills the game

Orkeosaurus wrote:I'm with TopC on this one, turnabout's fair play.

I dont know what the RAW support for this is, but I think its a fair way of doing things.

mrblacksunshine_1978 wrote:Sorry about this, but i had to make a phone call to GW customers service again. They explained that Doom is a special character name Zoanthrope and therefore bloody thing receives the 3++ invul save. End of story....people just stop reading everything so deeply.... this kills the game

1) Call them again, you'll get a different answer I bet
2) GW Customer Service is exactly that, Customer Service. They are not experts on the rules, most don't play the game, they exist to pack boxes, nothing more. My Labrador has more rules knowledge than them.
3) I just rang them now, and they said that the DoM does not have a 3++ save, and also that I am the Queen of Germany. Now, I annex Dakka in the name of Belgium!

Hey I'm not the one crying. The way in which you read the rules is by no means certainly correct, it's just your take on them, that's all.

G

Green Blow Fly wrote:Hey I'm not the one crying. The way in which you read the rules is by no means certainly correct, it's just your take on them, that's all.

Please explain how a rule that affects only Zoanthropes can affect something that is not a Zoanthrope.

If you claim the DoM has a 3++ save, then my Wolf Guard Terminators are also Deathwing Terminators.

Gwar! wrote:

Green Blow Fly wrote:Hey I'm not the one crying. The way in which you read the rules is by no means certainly correct, it's just your take on them, that's all.

Please explain how a rule that affects only Zoanthropes can affect something that is not a Zoanthrope.

If you claim the DoM has a 3++ save, then my Wolf Guard Terminators are also Deathwing Terminators.

Thats different codexs though. By your logic then my warlocks all now carry stormshields, eldrad has njals staff, and can cast nid and space wolf powers in addition to eldar ones. GBF is arguing within the nid dex. Red herring is a basic logical fallacy

I already explained to you at least a couple times. Use your scroll Fu for once.

G

Green Blow Fly wrote:I already explained to you at least a couple times. Use your scroll Fu for once.

G

No, you haven't actually. You have tried to assert that the DoM gets it for some reason, but I have yet to see any rules quote as to why.

Gwar! wrote:

Orkeosaurus wrote:I'm with TopC on this one, turnabout's fair play.

Not exactly why you feel the need to "deny" someone something it doesn't have anyway. RaW it affects units in Transports and RaW it has no Invulnerable Save. I fail to see how one would affect the other?

Well, logically if RaW is to be used as the base then both players may agree to change the rules (as stated by RaW) and I will merely refuse to give up my denial of the DoM's invulnerable save unless I can elicit a trade for protection from Leech for transported units, but further offer such a trade if I can, or accept if such a trade is made implicitly, as I prefer the result of the trade to the result of the unchanged ruleset, though I prefer both to the rules being changed for my opponent's benefit and not my own. It's all very scientific, you see.

Gwar I clearly presented the rules to make my case. If it's beyond your level of comprehension that's no fault of my own.

G

wait you missed the FAQ? It's because today is a day which end in Y.

..lol.. seriously. As far as playing goes, I'm all about the legal fisticuffs. If someone digs for my troops in transports my melta is going to dig into his DoM for a quick instant kill with no invulnerable save.

will it last forever? No... probably not, but likewise the argument goes that that frakkin' ability won't be able to dig in for my troopers eithers. They want it to be one way per RAW for the moment? Then that it is EXACTLY what they'll get--- the Scientologist treatment. (see my sig.)

Green Blow Fly wrote:Gwar I clearly presented the rules to make my case. If it's beyond your level of comprehension that's no fault of my own.

G

Humour me then and re-present it then, because I honestly cannot make it out.

@The Dragon: I actually had to go searching for what that quote was about. Can't believe I forgot that little nugget of Rules Knowledge

Are you kidding? That was Dakka gold on back ,lol

The rule for warpfield states it works for Zoies. The entry for the DoM states he has warpfield as well. Now here is the kicker so play close attention - the rule does not state warpfield does not work for the DoM. Now if the rule said something to the effect it only applies to Zoies that would something else entirely. It is not like we are saying it works for a Tyrant... We all know the answer to that one.

G

Green Blow Fly wrote:The rule for warpfield states it works for Zoies. The entry for the DoM states he has warpfield as well. Now here is the kicker so play close attention - the rule does not state warpfield does not work for the DoM. Now if the rule said something to the effect it only applies to Zoies that would something else entirely. It is not like we are saying it works for a Tyrant... We all know the answer to that one.

G

And as I have said, "It doesn't say I can't" is not an argument. The rules do not say that it DOES work for DoM, so it doesn't.

Why is "it doesnt say I cant" not an argument in this case. Arguments must be judged based on their validity depending on the situation. If I shoot at someone who broke into my house its different then gunning someone down at random on the street.

Then why does the DoM's entry have the warpfield listed? Answer that one.

G

Gwar, my personal point/stance is that if someone is going to argue RAW and get the units in my transport thats all fine and dandy, they just better be ready for me to argue raw and strip their nice 3+ invulnerable save...

in other words... some people feel they should get both! the ability to hit your guys in the transport and keep their 3+ invulnerable save. which im sure everyone can agree that if your going to argue RAI you only get one of those, and if your going to argue RAW which is all we really can argue w/ any chance of a decent answer that you cant have both either. lol...so i just see it as a defense against rules lawyering.. fine take your ability to hit guys in my transport, im going to instant kill you so fast it makes your head spin >.<

I grappled the shoggoth wrote:Why is "it doesnt say I cant" not an argument in this case. Arguments must be judged based on their validity depending on the situation. If I shoot at someone who broke into my house its different then gunning someone down at random on the street.

because then it would mean we were right in giving doom it's 3+ invul.

Really, in all honesty why would they bother putting the ability in Doom's plethora of goodies if it was just a rock in the candy bag? Also there is a difference being unable to read the rules properly and reading them so deep that you are burning a hole in it. I'm just thankful the people I play don't take things this far...it's just mind boggling how far people will try to convince others that how they read something makes more sense than how someone else read the exact same words.

Why wouldnt the doom be right in having a 3+ invulnerable? It has the warp field power. This means two things.

Either all things with the warp field power gain 3+ invulnerable saves or
The printing of warp field is a typo by GW

eh.. I call bs . for a 90pt. unit to be packing the mojo it does with the free and fast rules play being handed out..... nah nah nah... it needs a little check to give it some balance.

Until GW does it right-- it gets the RAW.

I grappled the shoggoth wrote:Why wouldnt the doom be right in having a 3+ invulnerable? It has the warp field power. This means two things.

Either all things with the warp field power gain 3+ invulnerable saves or
The printing of warp field is a typo by GW

Since the rule for Warp Field does NOT allow all things to benefit... you do the math.

If Warp Field had just said "This is a 3++ save", then it would benefit. As it is, Warp Field ONLY benefits Zoanthropes, nothing else.

I dont think its that spectacular, YMMV as I have never played against it. Seems like its a one hit wonder, and needs a pod that doesnt scatter to avoid dying. T4 with a 3+ isnt that good. And it sucks in hand to hand.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Gwar! wrote:

I grappled the shoggoth wrote:Why wouldnt the doom be right in having a 3+ invulnerable? It has the warp field power. This means two things.

Either all things with the warp field power gain 3+ invulnerable saves or
The printing of warp field is a typo by GW

Since the rule for Warp Field does NOT allow all things to benefit... you do the math.

If Warp Field had just said "This is a 3++ save", then it would benefit. As it is, Warp Field ONLY benefits Zoanthropes, nothing else.

So its a complete mistake on GWs part for typing warp field in the Dooms entry then?

Gwar!, unlike you, the rest of us realize that the writers of the Codexes for Warhammer 40,000 are a bunch of idiots, and so we need to use COMMON SENSE when interpreting their scribblings. Insisting upon a strict lieral reading of every word they haphazardly dump between the covers is no more than a vessel you use to start and/or perpetuate pointless and absurd arguments. I'm not going to bother trying to attack the merits of you argument, because it's completely pointless. Us normal folks who live in the real world know better, and that's all we need.

warpcrafter wrote:Gwar!, unlike you, the rest of us realize that the writers of the Codexes for Warhammer 40,000 are a bunch of idiots, and so we need to use COMMON SENSE when interpreting their scribblings. Insisting upon a strict lieral reading of every word they haphazardly dump between the covers is no more than a vessel you use to start and/or perpetuate pointless and absurd arguments. I'm not going to bother trying to attack the merits of you argument, because it's completely pointless. Us normal folks who live in the real world know better, and that's all we need.

Ad hominem is also a logical fallacy.

I grappled the shoggoth wrote:I dont think its that spectacular, YMMV as I have never played against it. Seems like its a one hit wonder, and needs a pod that doesnt scatter to avoid dying. T4 with a 3+ isnt that good. And it sucks in hand to hand.

In a 1000pt game, it ate about 569pts of my units then finally got shot down by a defiler surviving it's str 10 hit in CC. Overall, small pt games it will be a train wreck into your paraplegic school house...so to speak. Larger games, I'm sure people have the means to easily take down after it drops in as just volume fire will bring it down like any 2 wound marine.

Green Blow Fly wrote:Then why does the DoM's entry have the warpfield listed? Answer that one.

G

You realize that the Heirophant or whatever that huge ass 'nid thing from Apoc is called has warpfield. You telling me it works on him? The rule states it only works on zoeys. End of story until GW FAQs it or properly writes the rules in a future release (like that will happen).