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.

Ok, addressing the part you just edited in:

the jump pack gives the movement ability, and the Auspex allows the ability to shoot.

...and possessing a RF weapon gives the ability to shoot twice at up to 12"...

being a combiweapon doesn't allow it to shoot in a manor that it can't.

This has nothing whatsoever to do with it being a combiweapon. The model could (assuming it was possible... let's not go there again just yet) be carrying a Boltgun and a Meltagun, rather than a combi-weapon. It makes no difference. By the strict wording of the RF rules, the model only has to HAVE a RF weapon in order to gain the ability to shoot twice. No reference is made to those two shots only being available when shooting the RF weapon.

The Assault weapon has a distinct profile, that allows it to fire in a particular way.
The Rapid Fire weapon has a distinct profile, but a part of that profile is a special rule that affects the way the model carrying the weapon can shoot that is completely independant of the type of weapon being fired.

Here's the rule again:
"An infantry model armed with a Rapid Fire weapon can shoot twice at targets up to 12" away"

No reference is made to the shooting being confined to the RF weapon. Simply possessing the weapon grants the ability, in the same way that possessing a Jump Pack grants the ability to move as Jump Infantry.

a model carrying bolter and a powersword doesn't get to strike with the powersword twice within 12"!

Of course it doesn't. The rule granting the two shots only refers to shooting, not close combat.

Alarmingrick-  insaniak is trying to prove that the rules are poorly written and not proofread by an editor, and so make it to print with terrible wording and RAW interpretation problems.  insaniak has successfully proven that point.

He is not, according to his own statements, contending that it should be played that way.

But he has, as do I, 'broken with the faith' and insisted that the rules be edited by a competent editor.

Posted By insaniak on 05/01/2006 7:51 PM

okay, as annoyed as i get with GW and their inability on rules writing, doesn't common sense have to kick in at some point?

Of course it does. Hence my comment that I wouldn't actually play this way. But we were discussing what the book actually says, not how we would play it...

Since it is the section titled "Rapid Fire Weapons" we could realize that it only applies to rapid fire weapons but that would take applying context to a rule and that is what will cause confusion among those who want each line to stand on it's own.

The rapid fire rule doesn't say that it applies to other weapons or only the rapid fire weapon, but the context would limit it to the rapid fire weapon because of the heading. Of course the termi rapid firing and then charging is also open to the same disagreement because it doesn't actually say "may charge after firing any weapon" either.

The rule does not apply to the weapon at all, it applies to the model. The weapon does not shoot twice, the model does. That is the whole point.

"Alarmingrick- insaniak is trying to prove that the rules are poorly written and not proofread by an editor, and so make it to print with terrible wording and RAW interpretation problems. insaniak has successfully proven that point."


agreed.i've seen the light!

Since it is the section titled "Rapid Fire Weapons" we could realize that it only applies to rapid fire weapons but that would take applying context to a rule and that is what will cause confusion among those who want each line to stand on it's own.

Ok.

The Auspex is in a section titled 'Wargear. Do we therefore also have to realise that its rule only applies to Wargear, rather than allowing the model to shoot with any weapon?

The rapid fire rule doesn't say that it applies to other weapons or only the rapid fire weapon, but the context would limit it to the rapid fire weapon because of the heading.

As blue loki pointed out, the rapid fire rule doesn't apply to a weapon at all. It grants an ability to a model with a rapid fire weapon, not to the weapon itself.


So, if a model with an auspex can shoot with any weapon, why can a model with a rapid fire weapon not shoot twice with any weapon? Both simply allow a model to fire in a certain way, without limiting it to a particular weapon.

An auspex is a wargear item that gives an ability to a unit. Rapid Fire is an ability of a rapid fire weapon. The Rapid Fire rule does not convey an ability to the model itself, even if it is poorley worded. I'll look up the section heading when I get home later tonight to see if it prefaces that section with: "Some weapons have special rules as follows", which would make it clear that the rules only apply to the weapon that is listed below it, not the model carrying it.

My original point was that taking one line out of context affects it's meaning. I guess I just have to state it plainly to make that clear:

Taking a line out of context alters the meaning of the line.

Well, snoogums, I'm glad you know that, because you're king of doing that, as you so aptly demonstrated during the LOS debates.

Rapid Fire is an ability of a rapid fire weapon.

'Rapid Fire' is nothing of the kind. 'Rapid Fire' is not an ability at all, it's a category of weapon.

That category of weapon has a special rule that it grants to any model carrying such a weapon. Not firing, just carrying.

The Rapid Fire rule does not convey an ability to the model itself, even if it is poorley worded.

"An infantry model armed with a Rapid Fire weapon can shoot twice at targets up to 12" away"

If that's not conveying an ability to the model, just what exactly is it?

A model with this can do that.

Sure sounds like conveying an ability to me.

My original point was that taking one line out of context affects it's meaning.

And my point was that I am doing no such thing. The section details Rapid Fire weapons, and what they do in game. One of the things they do in game is allow the model carrying them to fire two shots.

I have no idea what you think is being taken out of context, because that's all pretty straight forward. It's not like I'm taking one section of the book that, say for example, has nothing to do with LOS and taking it to over-ride the clearly written LOS rules.

Being armed with a Rapid Fire weapon grants a model a particular ability. That's the way it is worded. I agree, once again, that it's not what they intended. My models armed with combi weapons will continue to fire the assault part as an assault weapon. But that doesn't change what is written in the book, which is what we were discussing.

it "looks" like it is clearly talking about a weapon type.
it's under "weapon types", pg. 29 BGB.

also checked daemonhunters codex, under combi weapon:
".....but the other weapon may only be fired once per battle."
wouldn't this prevent it from firing twice?

it "looks" like it is clearly talking about a weapon type.

It is talking about a weapon type.

The weapon type is 'Rapid Fire'
Rapid Fire weapons convey an ability to the model armed with them
That ability is not made specific to a particular weapon type. The model has the ability purely by being armed with a Rapid Fire weapon.

Basically, the ability is granted by the weapon, not to the weapon.

All because they said 'armed with' instead of 'firing'

also checked daemonhunters codex, under combi weapon:
".....but the other weapon may only be fired once per battle."
wouldn't this prevent it from firing twice?

Probably. So long as you assume that the combi-weapon rule over-rides the rapid fire rule.

Makes no difference to a model with a bolter and a meltagun though... again, assuming that were possible. Although on that line of thought, how about Guard Heavy Weapon teams? Heavy Weapons Teams still have Lasguns... and so can technically fire a lascannon twice at a target within 12".

"... and so can technically fire a lascannon twice at a target within 12"."

stop planting such evil seeds in the young minds reading this!

Posted By Centurian99 on 05/02/2006 5:17 PM
Well, snoogums, I'm glad you know that, because you're king of doing that, as you so aptly demonstrated during the LOS debates.

The only reason LOS arguments always default to the literal people is because that is the standard shoutdown on Dakka. Many posters have already shown that the literal model's eye view is incorrect, but it continues anyway because people just can't accept an abstract system. I use the same quotes to back up my statements as they do, theyjust ignore anything around it to prove their point, this is just another example of the same thing.

But to back myself up here.

Page 28, Weapon Type:

""Different weapons have different charactersitics when they fire. For example..snip...These qualities are all represented by a weapon's type. All weapons will be classified as either Rapid Fire, Pistol, Assault or Heavy.

Some weapons may be able to fire in different ways, representing different power setting or different types of ammo. Where this is the case there will be a seperate line in each of the weapons profile for each.

Some weapons such as storm bolters and multi-lasers fire multiple shots. Where this is the case the number of shots a weapon fires is noted after its type. For example...snip

In addition to the weapon type, a weapon may have some additional characteristics that define the way they work....snip"

The type does determine it's characteristic, and the characteristics only apply to the weapon, not the model. It says, just like I said, right before the weapon type list that the weapon types apply to  the weapon, it does not say they appply to the model. It's neat to look at the rest of the book instead of the two lines that people post to back up their slowed rules interpretations. Tell me again where it defines the body of the model that bird's eye view uses. Where does it say that you use the profile to literally see the body. It doesn't because model's are defined as taking an area on the board and having a size level, it even says not to use the actual model because of blah blah blah on page 7. This always gets ignored because people are retards and want their modelling to screw up the game so they can complain on Dakka instead of reading ALL of the rules.

The only reason LOS arguments always default to the literal people is because that is the standard shoutdown on Dakka.
Uh, no, it's because of what the book actually says...


Many posters have already shown that the literal model's eye view is incorrect, but it continues anyway because people just can't accept an abstract system.
People can accept an abstract system just fine. What they can't accept is an argument that has no basis in the actual rules. You use quotes, yes, but then you try to claim that they mean something other than what they actually mean, and persist in claiming that when drawing a LOS, the LOS rules are over-ridden by a section that has nothing whatsoever to do with LOS.



The type does determine it's characteristic, and the characteristics only apply to the weapon, not the model.
Except, once again, this is not supported by actual rules.

"An infantry model armed with a Rapid Fire weapon can shoot twice at targets up to 12" away"

This is very clearly applying to the model, not the weapon, regardless of what it says elsewhere in the section. Rules in one section of the book do occasionally apply in other situations.


Tell me again where it defines the body of the model that bird's eye view uses.
Since the 'bird's eye view' is never referenced in any way by the rules, that would be a little difficult. Perhaps if you take the time to learn the actual rules, it might help your understanding of them.


Where does it say that you use the profile to literally see the body.
Page 21.


It doesn't because model's are defined as taking an area on the board
...for measurement purposes


and having a size level,
...for drawing a LOS into or through Area Terrain and close combats


it even says not to use the actual model
...in those particular situations.

So who, exactly, is taking rules out of context?

You, since you completely cut out the Weapon Type quotes I just used to show that the types listed on the next page only apply to the weapon. Have fun in denial.

Denial of what? I already said I have no interest in playing this way. It's merely an example of yet another sloppy bit of GW writing.

I ignored the Weapon Type quotes because they are irrelevant to the issue. What you quoted does nothing more than explain that 'These are weapons. This is what they do.'

None of it in any way changes the fact that Rapid Fire weapons impart a specific ability to the model carrying them. This is an ability that is only granted when the model is carrying a Rapid Fire weapon ... hence the rule's inclusion in the Rapid Fire section. That doesn't change the fact that the way it is written, the ability is granted to the model.

This isn't rocket science... it's basic reading comprehension.

Once again: It's obviously not the way it is supposed to work. It's clearly an error. But it IS what the rules actually say.

If you get this worked up over the idea that a book contains an error, I'd hate to see your reaction when something that actually matters goes wrong...

Actually, you are doing exaclty what I am talking about. You are blatanetly admitting that your are ignoring the text immediately proceeding the weapon type list that explains how the weapon types apply to the weapon, not the model. It is very clear that this is the case, and the rules support my interpretation. You are taking a single line and saying that it broadly applies to everything, right after it says that it only applies to that weapon type.

The personal jab at the end is also counterproductive as all it does is attempt to incite an argument.

Actually, you are doing exaclty what I am talking about. You are blatanetly admitting that your are ignoring the text immediately proceeding the weapon type list that explains how the weapon types apply to the weapon, not the model.

That's because that section does nothing of the sort.

It says 'These are the weapon types. Here's how they work'

It does not state that 'all the rules listed in this section apply solely to the weapon' and it wouldn't matter if it did, since the Rapid Fire section clearly does otherwise.

You are taking a single line and saying that it broadly applies to everything

No I'm not. I'm taking a rule that is specific to Rapid Fire weapons and saying that it applies to any model that is carrying a Rapid Fire weapon. And I'm saying that because that's exactly what the rulebook says.

The personal jab at the end is also counterproductive as all it does is attempt to incite an argument.

Absolutely. How terrible of me. Next thing you know I'll be referring to people as retards. Wouldn't want that, now would we?

Here is Craig.
Craig is a marine, he (somehow) is ARMED with a Bolter and a Meltagun. When you're armed with something, you simply have it, you dont need to fire it or anything.
Meltagun = Assault weapon
Bolter = Rapid Fire weapon

A model ARMED WITH a Rapid Fire weapon may shoot twice up to 12". When you're armed with something, you simply have it, you dont need to fire it or anything.
Bolter = Rapid Fire? Yes. The model is ARMED with a Rapid Fire weapon.

May shoot twice up to 12", shoot what? The Rapid Fire weapon? Dont need to, Craig is simply ARMED with the weapon.
Meltagun can shoot twice up to 12".

Posted By insaniak on 05/02/2006 10:31 PM

Actually, you are doing exaclty what I am talking about. You are blatanetly admitting that your are ignoring the text immediately proceeding the weapon type list that explains how the weapon types apply to the weapon, not the model.

That's because that section does nothing of the sort.

It says 'These are the weapon types. Here's how they work'

It does not state that 'all the rules listed in this section apply solely to the weapon' and it wouldn't matter if it did, since the Rapid Fire section clearly does otherwise.

"Some weapons may be able to fire in different ways, representing different power setting or different types of ammo. Where this is the case there will be a seperate line in each of the weapons profile for each."

Actually, it does say that the type only applies to that kind of weapon. This line sets up the requirement that the gun be firing to have the special rules apply. That is what is limiting the scope to the weapon with that type, not to the model as a whole. As you already said, this is basic reading comprehension.

 

...sigh...


"Different weapons have different charactersitics when they fire. For example..snip...These qualities are all represented by a weapon's type. All weapons will be classified as either Rapid Fire, Pistol, Assault or Heavy."

Nothing so far that specifies that any special abilities granted by a weapon type apply only when firing that weapon. Merely a list of the different types, and a mention that the different types have different characteristics.



"Some weapons may be able to fire in different ways, representing different power setting or different types of ammo. Where this is the case there will be a seperate line in each of the weapons profile for each.

So, some weapons work in a couple of different ways. Still nothing relevant here.


"Some weapons such as storm bolters and multi-lasers fire multiple shots. Where this is the case the number of shots a weapon fires is noted after its type. For example...snip

Again, merely a mention that the way a weapon works is listed in its profile. Still no mention that special rules granted by the weapon apply only when that weapon is being fired.



"In addition to the weapon type, a weapon may have some additional characteristics that define the way they work....snip"

Bingo. Note that it still doesn't say that any rules listed in the weapon's profile apply only to that weapon. It merely says that it may have additional characteristics that define how the weapon works.

One of the 'additional characteristics' of a Rapid Fire weapon is that it grants a special ability to the model carrying it.

Nowhere, in any of that, does it even remotely suggest that this special ability would only apply when the model is firing any particular type of weapon.

Thanks for trying, though.

"Note that it still doesn't say that any rules listed in the weapon's profile apply only to that weapon."

doesn't being in one weapon's profile, and not anothers, make it exclusive to it?

bolter = rapid fire

lascannon = heavy 1

meltagun = assault 1

if either of the other weapons were intended to be RF, wouldn't they be listed in their profile as heavy 1/ rapid fire etc...?

sorry, i had to try!

and it seems to me rapid fire is an ability given to the weapon, as opposed the the model carrying. it references it in the weapon types section. not the models abilities section. the model has the ability to "shoot" a weapon. the various range of shooting characteristics are determined by the weapon and it's abilities given to it in it's profile.

doesn't being in one weapon's profile, and not anothers, make it exclusive to it?

It is exclusive to it. Only a model carrying a Rapid Fire weapon gets that ability.

But it's exclusive to a model carrying a Rapid Fire weapon, not a model firing a Rapid Fire weapon.

if either of the other weapons were intended to be RF, wouldn't they be listed in their profile as heavy 1/ rapid fire etc...?

None of the other weapons are intended to be Rapid Fire. Only Rapid Fire weapons are Rapid Fire weapons.

However, Rapid Fire weapons grant the model the ability to fire 2 shots at 12". As I've said (several times) before, what is needed to make the rule say what it should say is either that the model firing a RF weapon can shoot twice, or that a model armed with a RF weapon can shoot twice with that weapon ... both of which really mean the same thing, but neither of which are actually included in what is written on the page.

and it seems to me rapid fire is an ability given to the weapon, as opposed the the model carrying

Again, Rapid Fire is not an ability, it is a class of weapon. That class of weapon gives the ability to fire 2 shots at 12" to a model armed with such a weapon.

"An infantry model armed with a Rapid Fire weapon can shoot twice at targets up to 12" away"

That is granting an ability to a model. To be granting an ability to the weapon, it would have to say 'Rapid Fire weapons can fire twice at targets up to 12" away'... which would be a problem, since RF weapons don't have a BS.