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.

 Kevin949 wrote:
And no, it's not like Thunder Hammers because those cause the bearer to "strike at initiative 1", they do not "become" initiative 1.

Not anymore. Concussive changes your actual Initiative value until the end of the next assault phase.

rigeld2 wrote:

 Kevin949 wrote:
And no, it's not like Thunder Hammers because those cause the bearer to "strike at initiative 1", they do not "become" initiative 1.

Not anymore. Concussive changes your actual Initiative value until the end of the next assault phase.

Sorry, I meant for wielding them...wasn't even thinking about concussive.

The only thing that I don't know is if they happen at the same time. There is something involving whip coils about rolling on in the FAQ as far as which happens first.

If the whips go into effect first, or already in affect then yes the combo would work.

jegsar wrote:
The only thing that I don't know is if they happen at the same time. There is something involving whip coils about rolling on in the FAQ as far as which happens first.

If the whips go into effect first, or already in affect then yes the combo would work.

They do, they both take effect at the start of the fight sub phase. There's no roll that you talk about, as far I remember the person whose turn it is gets to choose the order of operations. The roll you speak of is them mentioning set value modifiers that oppose each other, such as Whip coils and some equipment that sets your initiative to 10 (I think it was some mask mentioned). Those you roll off on.

Banshee mask.

"Counts as" does not mean "is". Best example I can think of would be a unit deploying from a drop pod "counts as" deep striking. If said units drop pod were to land outside of something like warp quake and the unit disembarked into warp quake they would be unaffected.

So if wc makes you "count as" initiative 1 that doesn't make you initiative 1. So I don't see why you'd take the test at initiative 1.

IamCaboose wrote:
"Counts as" does not mean "is". Best example I can think of would be a unit deploying from a drop pod "counts as" deep striking. If said units drop pod were to land outside of something like warp quake and the unit disembarked into warp quake they would be unaffected.

So if wc makes you "count as" initiative 1 that doesn't make you initiative 1. So I don't see why you'd take the test at initiative 1.

Again, it's the whole "regardless of their actual initiative value" that you're leaving out.

IamCaboose wrote:
"Counts as" does not mean "is". Best example I can think of would be a unit deploying from a drop pod "counts as" deep striking. If said units drop pod were to land outside of something like warp quake and the unit disembarked into warp quake they would be unaffected.

So if wc makes you "count as" initiative 1 that doesn't make you initiative 1. So I don't see why you'd take the test at initiative 1.

No, really - counts as must mean is. In your example, the unit would mishap.

And how would they mishap without the drop pod?
Did the doors pop open while falling?
Counts as does not mean is, otherwise there would be no need for counts as.

IamCaboose wrote:
And how would they mishap without the drop pod?
Did the doors pop open while falling?
Counts as does not mean is, otherwise there would be no need for counts as.

You're trying to insert fluff into rules - don't.

vehicle that only pivots in the Movement phase counts as Stationary

So they aren't stationary and therefore suffer the effects of shooting while moving, etc.

If it does so, it counts as having already fired one weapon in its following Shooting phase,however, any additional weapons it fires that turn can choose a different target to that of the bomb.

This sentence means nothing then because it didn't actually shoot a weapon in the following shooting phase, so there's no restriction.

The vehicle may not fire any of its weapons in the same turn as it used smoke launchers, but counts as obscured in the next enemy Shooting phase, receiving a 5+ cover save.

Smoke launchers do nothing. Awesome interpretation.

Want more examples of how your argument cannot be correct?

rigeld2 wrote:

IamCaboose wrote:
And how would they mishap without the drop pod?
Did the doors pop open while falling?
Counts as does not mean is, otherwise there would be no need for counts as.

You're trying to insert fluff into rules - don't.

vehicle that only pivots in the Movement phase counts as Stationary

So they aren't stationary and therefore suffer the effects of shooting while moving, etc.

If it does so, it counts as having already fired one weapon in its following Shooting phase,however, any additional weapons it fires that turn can choose a different target to that of the bomb.

This sentence means nothing then because it didn't actually shoot a weapon in the following shooting phase, so there's no restriction.

The vehicle may not fire any of its weapons in the same turn as it used smoke launchers, but counts as obscured in the next enemy Shooting phase, receiving a 5+ cover save.

Smoke launchers do nothing. Awesome interpretation.

Want more examples of how your argument cannot be correct?

A vehicle turning is, in the literal sense, a vehicle moving. Therefore the "count as" comes into play. Since it's not literally stationary they allow it to "count as" stationary. This is in place for those awesome rules lawyers out there that would try to claim, and technically be correct, that since you turned your vehicle it did in fact move.

I don't have my BRB on me at the moment but I do believe the rule for being obscured is 25% of the model covered. Now if your vehicle is in the open, with absolutely nothing in front of it, then it can't possibly be obscurred as per the BRB rule for obscurred. Here again, "count as" saves the day! While literally the vehicle is not obscurred, it doesn't meet the key requirement, smoke allows it to "count as" obscurred.

Terminators, or any relentless unit, moving. Clearly they're not stationary since they went from point A to point B...but they "count as" moving for the purposes of shooting and assaulting. So by your interpretation of "count as" the same relentless unit would move through difficult terrain without penalty because they "is", in this case "are", stationary...or maybe they wouldn't ever move at all because they would always be stationary...

A unit that enters play by deepstrike may not move or assault that turn, but may shoot as normal always counting as moving. So back to my original example, a unit from a drop pod couldn't disembark if they were deep striking because they couldn't make the disembark move. So they "count as" deep striking for the purposes of shooting and assaults. Though the assault part for drop pods is now more related to the movement speed, where as in 5th it was the "count as" deep striking that solely prevented units from assaulting from pods.

More examples please, and thank you.

IamCaboose wrote:
A vehicle turning is, in the literal sense, a vehicle moving. Therefore the "count as" comes into play. Since it's not literally stationary they allow it to "count as" stationary. This is in place for those awesome rules lawyers out there that would try to claim, and technically be correct, that since you turned your vehicle it did in fact move.

And by your argument (counts as is not the same thing as is) "counting as" stationary means nothing - because the vehicle was not stationary.

I don't have my BRB on me at the moment but I do believe the rule for being obscured is 25% of the model covered. Now if your vehicle is in the open, with absolutely nothing in front of it, then it can't possibly be obscurred as per the BRB rule for obscurred. Here again, "count as" saves the day! While literally the vehicle is not obscurred, it doesn't meet the key requirement, smoke allows it to "count as" obscurred.

Irrelevant - the rule does not say that it can count as being obscured - it says that the vehicle must be 25% covered to be considered obscured. Since count as does not mean is, the vehicle is not obscured.

Terminators, or any relentless unit, moving. Clearly they're not stationary since they went from point A to point B...but they "count as" moving for the purposes of shooting and assaulting. So by your interpretation of "count as" the same relentless unit would move through difficult terrain without penalty because they "is", in this case "are", stationary...or maybe they wouldn't ever move at all because they would always be stationary...

No, because relentless only counts as being stationary for the purposes of shooting Heavy, Salvo, or Ordnance weapons.

A unit that enters play by deepstrike may not move or assault that turn, but may shoot as normal always counting as moving. So back to my original example, a unit from a drop pod couldn't disembark if they were deep striking because they couldn't make the disembark move. So they "count as" deep striking for the purposes of shooting and assaults. Though the assault part for drop pods is now more related to the movement speed, where as in 5th it was the "count as" deep striking that solely prevented units from assaulting from pods.

They can disembark because the rules explicitly allow (indeed - require) them to.

 Kevin949 wrote:

IamCaboose wrote:
"Counts as" does not mean "is". Best example I can think of would be a unit deploying from a drop pod "counts as" deep striking. If said units drop pod were to land outside of something like warp quake and the unit disembarked into warp quake they would be unaffected.

So if wc makes you "count as" initiative 1 that doesn't make you initiative 1. So I don't see why you'd take the test at initiative 1.

Again, it's the whole "regardless of their actual initiative value" that you're leaving out.

That phrase is my issue with the interpretation. Coils state the INI "counts as" but also clearly addresses that the model has an "actual Initiative." as well as a modified INI.

I would say "counts as" is not the same as "is". If something permanently effects a stat, then i'd say it does. Examples being the BA death mask, or having Ini reduced to 1 permanently from a chrono cryptek's weapon. Those things would count, but not being unwieldy/whip coiled/ banshee masked/having a force halberd, etc.

abbazabba1920 wrote:
I would say "counts as" is not the same as "is".

And you'd be as wrong as the other person saying so. Read a few posts up as to why.

IamCaboose wrote:
A vehicle turning is, in the literal sense, a vehicle moving. Therefore the "count as" comes into play. Since it's not literally stationary they allow it to "count as" stationary. This is in place for those awesome rules lawyers out there that would try to claim, and technically be correct, that since you turned your vehicle it did in fact move.

And by your argument (counts as is not the same thing as is) "counting as" stationary means nothing - because the vehicle was not stationary.

That retort makes no sense. Did you even read the example? If a vehicle turns in place, and does not move forward or backwards, it has literally moved, but the rulebook says it "counts as" stationary. I can't spell that out for you anymore than that.

I don't have my BRB on me at the moment but I do believe the rule for being obscured is 25% of the model covered. Now if your vehicle is in the open, with absolutely nothing in front of it, then it can't possibly be obscurred as per the BRB rule for obscurred. Here again, "count as" saves the day! While literally the vehicle is not obscurred, it doesn't meet the key requirement, smoke allows it to "count as" obscurred.

Irrelevant - the rule does not say that it can count as being obscured - it says that the vehicle must be 25% covered to be considered obscured. Since count as does not mean is, the vehicle is not obscured.

I dont think you're even trying anymore.

Terminators, or any relentless unit, moving. Clearly they're not stationary since they went from point A to point B...but they "count as" moving for the purposes of shooting and assaulting. So by your interpretation of "count as" the same relentless unit would move through difficult terrain without penalty because they "is", in this case "are", stationary...or maybe they wouldn't ever move at all because they would always be stationary...

No, because relentless only counts as being stationary for the purposes of shooting Heavy, Salvo, or Ordnance weapons.

Wait what was that?! "No ,because relentless only COUNTS AS being stationary for the purposes of shooting...blah blah blah" According to you "counts as"="is", and if they "is" stationary then how could they possibly have moved?

You can't have the "counts as" meaning be situational.

personally, i think that since;

A: the brb does not tell us to use modified or unmodified stats, you simply use what they are at the time of the test. certain weapons and wargear, IE powerfists and banshee masks or halbreds for the GK state something like "close combat attacks double in strength, or strikes at init 10, etc." so clearly those items would not allow a characteristic check on them.

B: some items however, have been emmended in 6th to provide a constant stat bonus. the biggest one, being space marine bikes. a normal SM captain is toughness 4. but give him a bike, and hes toughness 5 for everything. ID, wounding, etc. that would include toughness tests.

C: since the wraith rule for whip coils specfically mentions a set value modifier, and goes on to state "regardless of whatever its actual initiave is" - that is rather specfic wording. we also have, courtesy of the FAQ a specfic set of rules for when they take effect, how long they last, and what happens should the wraith die, or non btb models consolodate in on them. therefore, with a specfic rule set vrs the vaugue rules of characteristic tests - as long as the model targeted by times arrow
1. in btb with the c'tan
2. in btb with a whipcoil wraith at the START of the fight
3. its the necron turn (since one could argue they both go off same time, and therefore the active player chooses, and could choose on their turn to have times arrow if used go off before the whip coils)

i will also point out, that the whip coils do not say the model strikes at init 1, or strikes last etc - wich would infer the penalty only applies to combat attacks, it states the initiave value of the model IS 1 - regardless of actual. the whole "counts as argument" seems kind of ... sideways here.

so to summerize:

- characteristic tests do tell us what to use, and they lack the wording "always use unmodified" (wich was present in 5th)
- sweeping advances DO state to use unmodifed values, supporting the above. (why mention always use unmodified if all tests were to use unmodifed anyway?)
- the wording of the whip coil rule and the faq support that the effect is a set value modifier, that takes effect after all others and reduces the value to 1 during the entire assault phase
- other modifers such as bikes, provide permanent bonus to stats wich modify the profile, for things like ID and other tests.

seems to me you use modifed profiles unless the ability/situation calling for the test states otherwise. this can obviously work out in favor of the tester or the testee... depending on the bonus/penalty and nature of the test.

IamCaboose wrote:

IamCaboose wrote:
A vehicle turning is, in the literal sense, a vehicle moving. Therefore the "count as" comes into play. Since it's not literally stationary they allow it to "count as" stationary. This is in place for those awesome rules lawyers out there that would try to claim, and technically be correct, that since you turned your vehicle it did in fact move.

And by your argument (counts as is not the same thing as is) "counting as" stationary means nothing - because the vehicle was not stationary.

That retort makes no sense. Did you even read the example? If a vehicle turns in place, and does not move forward or backwards, it has literally moved, but the rulebook says it "counts as" stationary. I can't spell that out for you anymore than that.

Right - you're saying that "counts as" does not mean "is". Therefore while the vehicle "counts as" stationary, this means nothing as nothing in the rules allows for something that counts as stationary - only things that are stationary.

I don't have my BRB on me at the moment but I do believe the rule for being obscured is 25% of the model covered. Now if your vehicle is in the open, with absolutely nothing in front of it, then it can't possibly be obscurred as per the BRB rule for obscurred. Here again, "count as" saves the day! While literally the vehicle is not obscurred, it doesn't meet the key requirement, smoke allows it to "count as" obscurred.

Irrelevant - the rule does not say that it can count as being obscured - it says that the vehicle must be 25% covered to be considered obscured. Since count as does not mean is, the vehicle is not obscured.

I dont think you're even trying anymore.

You think wrong.

Terminators, or any relentless unit, moving. Clearly they're not stationary since they went from point A to point B...but they "count as" moving for the purposes of shooting and assaulting. So by your interpretation of "count as" the same relentless unit would move through difficult terrain without penalty because they "is", in this case "are", stationary...or maybe they wouldn't ever move at all because they would always be stationary...

No, because relentless only counts as being stationary for the purposes of shooting Heavy, Salvo, or Ordnance weapons.

Wait what was that?! "No ,because relentless only COUNTS AS being stationary for the purposes of shooting...blah blah blah" According to you "counts as"="is", and if they "is" stationary then how could they possibly have moved?

You can't have the "counts as" meaning be situational.

I'm not - the rules do. They are stationary for the purposes of shooting.

rigeld2 is absolutely right. There is no doubt about it. For all intents and purposes ingame "count as" equals "is". I still remember the endless arguments in 5th about CTan Worldspace and Orikan's mines. The next faq was clear: "count as" equals "is".

copper.talos wrote:
rigeld2 is absolutely right. There is no doubt about it. For all intents and purposes ingame "count as" equals "is". I still remember the endless arguments in 5th about CTan Worldspace and Orikan's mines. The next faq was clear: "count as" equals "is".

And when copper and I agree one of three things is happening.
1) I'm actually right
2) I've hacked his account
3) The world is ending

I'll leave the reader to decide which one happened.

rigeld2 wrote:

copper.talos wrote:
rigeld2 is absolutely right. There is no doubt about it. For all intents and purposes ingame "count as" equals "is". I still remember the endless arguments in 5th about CTan Worldspace and Orikan's mines. The next faq was clear: "count as" equals "is".

And when copper and I agree one of three things is happening.
1) I'm actually right
2) I've hacked his account
3) The world is ending

I'll leave the reader to decide which one happened.

Lol ok, good to know this entire debate was pointless. All it took was for some guy to come in and say, "hey hes right because I agree with him." Who needs actual logic?


GG man GG

And apologies to the OP for accidentally hijacking this post. I hope your question was answered somewhere in there.

IamCaboose wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:

copper.talos wrote:
rigeld2 is absolutely right. There is no doubt about it. For all intents and purposes ingame "count as" equals "is". I still remember the endless arguments in 5th about CTan Worldspace and Orikan's mines. The next faq was clear: "count as" equals "is".

And when copper and I agree one of three things is happening.
1) I'm actually right
2) I've hacked his account
3) The world is ending

I'll leave the reader to decide which one happened.

Lol ok, good to know this entire debate was pointless. All it took was for some guy to come in and say, "hey hes right because I agree with him." Who needs actual logic?


GG man GG

And apologies to the OP for accidentally hijacking this post. I hope your question was answered somewhere in there.

I responded with logic. That last post was an attempt at humor.
Care to find an example in the rules that allows a vehicle that counts as being stationary to do anything that a vehicle that actually was stationary can?

Until you find that rule, the pivoting vehicle rule is useless - unless you accept that counts as = is.

rigeld2 wrote:

IamCaboose wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:

copper.talos wrote:
rigeld2 is absolutely right. There is no doubt about it. For all intents and purposes ingame "count as" equals "is". I still remember the endless arguments in 5th about CTan Worldspace and Orikan's mines. The next faq was clear: "count as" equals "is".

And when copper and I agree one of three things is happening.
1) I'm actually right
2) I've hacked his account
3) The world is ending

I'll leave the reader to decide which one happened.

Lol ok, good to know this entire debate was pointless. All it took was for some guy to come in and say, "hey hes right because I agree with him." Who needs actual logic?


GG man GG

And apologies to the OP for accidentally hijacking this post. I hope your question was answered somewhere in there.

I responded with logic. That last post was an attempt at humor.
Care to find an example in the rules that allows a vehicle that counts as being stationary to do anything that a vehicle that actually was stationary can?

Until you find that rule, the pivoting vehicle rule is useless - unless you accept that counts as = is.

It's only useless because you can't understand the difference between "counts as" and "is". I've given you plenty of proof of what "counts as" means.

But hey whats it matter, red shirt #3 agreed with you so you win by default right?

hmmm

at the risk of the thread being locked for going off topic... i think the answer was yes, whip coils / times arrow combo works to make the times arrow target test on init 1?

otherwise i would also argue, that "counts as" is pretty much the same as "is", provided we are reffering to in game mechanics where you can have rules allowing you essentially break other rules. (ie moving and shooting being broken by relentless because they "count as" etc etc.)

however in the real world i dont think its the same. my 87' pontiac "counts as" a astin martin db7... but thats not what it "is" as such.... although i suppose waving a toy gun at a bank, would acomplish the opposite since the toy gun "counts as" a real one as far as the tellers and sniper cops are concerend.... so i guess its all subjective. im also pretty sure the brb has rules regarding "counts as" situations, and what can count as what, and so on. like a space marine cant count as a baneblade. although.... how far can a plastic space marine actually count?


...

IamCaboose wrote:

It's only useless because you can't understand the difference between "counts as" and "is". I've given you plenty of proof of what "counts as" means.

But hey whats it matter, red shirt #3 agreed with you so you win by default right?

Have you found permission for a vehicle that counts as being stationary to do anything special yet? The only actual rules refer to vehicles that are stationary. If counts as and is are not the same, you must find permission to use the stationary rules for vehicles that merely count as stationary.

Also, you must find permission for Terminators to move and not fire Snap Shots. According to you, since they only count as stationary for the purposes of firing Heavy weapons you must find rules for what counting as stationary means - it cannot mean you use the rules as if they were stationary because that would mean count as means the same thing as is.

But hey, what's it matter - I made a joke and you're over-reacting. I'm sorry it offended you. Perhaps you'd like to find the rules I've asked in this post? I'm willing to look into anything you find. Really, any rule that you can cite showing a difference between counts as and is would be welcome.

As above. Counts as == Is, otherwise they have absolutely no effect.

rigeld2 wrote:

copper.talos wrote:
rigeld2 is absolutely right. There is no doubt about it. For all intents and purposes ingame "count as" equals "is". I still remember the endless arguments in 5th about CTan Worldspace and Orikan's mines. The next faq was clear: "count as" equals "is".

And when copper and I agree one of three things is happening.
1) I'm actually right
2) I've hacked his account
3) The world is ending

I'll leave the reader to decide which one happened.

Well I got really drunk yesterday. That might explain a few embarassing things I did!