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.

Flavius Infernus wrote:Sorry to shoot down everybody on the logic front, but Timmah's argument is logically sound (which by definition makes it also logically valid btw).

P1 "When a unit falls back from combat, the victors make a Sweeping Advance." (p40)
P2 A librarian in Terminator armor who wins close combat is a victor
C: When a unit falls back from combat, a librarian in terminator armor makes a sweeping advance.

Valid & sound. In fact, by the RAW, a librarian in terminator armor *must* make a sweeping advance (unless he's part of a unit of terminators).

This argument is valid, but unsound. The conclusion follows from the premises, which makes its form valid. Its content of its premises is incomplete and thus the argument is unsound despite its validity, because it is a false conclusion drawn from true premises.

Flavius Infernus wrote:The only premises you might insert here to try to make an exception do not change the RAW argument.

P40 "Some troops, as detailed in their entries, are not allowed to make a sweeping advance." The restriction is not specified anywhere in the librarian's entry.

A Librarian's army list entry details the option of taking Terminator Armour. A model equipped with Terminator Armour cannot make a sweeping advance. This is what makes the conclusion of the above argument false, despite its valid inference from the given premises.

Flavius Infernus wrote:C:SM p 102 "Terminators cannot perform a sweeping advance." By the RAW, a librarian in terminator armor is *not* a terminator. To claim that he is is a fallacy of equivocation--like claiming that Dark Eldar "Warriors" get WBB rolls because they have the same word in their name that Necron "Warriors" do.

Likewise incorrect. The Terminator Armour entry in the Wargear Armour section of Codex: Space Marines specifies that Space Marines equipped with Terminator Armour are Terminators.

Flavius Infernus wrote:

Nurglitch wrote:Okay. I will provide it only on one condition: that you provide to me the passage in Codex: Space Marines, that states Tactical Marines move 6". Do we have a deal?

BGB p 11 "Infantry move up to 6" in the movement phase."
C:SM p 134 Tactical marine unit type = "Infantry"

Therefore, Tactical marines move up to 6"

Now it's your turn to quote your rules that prove your argument, Nurg

I asked for the specific passage in Codex; Space Marines that states that Tactical Marines move 6". I see no such passage quoted. You have simply taken two passages and made an inference.

Which is good, because that is how most of the Warhammer 40,000 rules work. You have to infer many of the rules and their applications from other rules in the game. Which is why I asked Timmah to cite me the passage that gives explicit permission for Tactical Space Marines to move 6", because there isn't one. There doesn't have to be one, because the only sound inference of two passages you've quoted is that Tactical Space Marines move 6".

The reason I chose this example should be plain: To make the point that not every rule in the game is detailed by the rules, and that even the very basic rules of the game require us to make inference. I wanted to make the point that Timmah's standard of proof for what the rules say is thus not a reasonable standard of proof.

Terminator Armour, Armour, Wargear, Codex: Space Marines, p.102 wrote:Due to the powerful exoskeleton and power sources built into their armour, models in Terminator armour have the relentless universal special rule.

On the other hand, this armour is somewhat cumbersome, so Space Marine Terminators are not able to purse a more lightly armoured foe when they flee. Terminators cannot perform a Sweeping Advance.

Likewise, the only sound inference one can make from the rules governing the wargear Terminator Armour is that all models equipped with Terminator Armour are Terminators. Since they are Terminators, they cannot make sweeping advances.

The fact is that the rulebook has to be a finite size, so it cannot explicitly state every last little rule of the game. It states some general rules about the game, some structural rules about itself, and leaves it to the players to deduce whatever rules apply to any specific situation they may come across.

Even widely used rules like "Tactical Space Marines move 6" in the Movement phase" are actually inferences, which is why what people call "RAW" is stupid. The rules, as they are written, constitute only some of the rules of the game, and beyond the usual illiteracy and lack of actually reading the rules, some rules questions can only be solved by the application of a basic predicate calculus, or classical logic.

Nurglitch wrote:ikewise incorrect. The Terminator Armour entry in the Wargear Armour section of Codex: Space Marines specifies that Space Marines equipped with Terminator Armour are Terminators.

This is what I have asked for from the beginning. Thank you for correcting me.

Now if you could just please site the passage that states "models equipped with terminator armor are terminators".

Thanks

Sure, whenever you cite the passage that states "Tactical Space Marines move 6" in the Movement phase."

Thanks.

Timmah wrote:Again, different wargear can work differently for different models. (see tyranid codex)

The "wargear" in the codex works identically for every model.
If you meant the weapons, the comment is still false.

At most the strength value varies, but the "wargear" works the same - no rules are varied or printed for any specific model in the Tyranid codex.

Perhaps you could say things like Storm Shields work differently between different Codecii, but I am pretty sure that is still irrelevant.

Timmah wrote:

Kaaihn wrote:This is where you are cherry picking. As I just said, under the heading of Wargear: Terminator Armour, any descriptive phrases contained in that section are used interchangeably. "Terminator Armour", "Space Marine Terminator", and "Terminator" are all interchangeable here. All are used to tell you that this piece of wargear prevents sweeping advance.

Where is the proof they are an interchangable term? You continue to sight your beliefs but no actual wording.
Every other use of it states units in terminator armor. Why the sudden switch in terminology for this one rule?

The proof is in the usage of the English language, honestly. I'm not trying to be snarky, but that is the answer to your question. This is a reading comprehension and language barrier at this point.

Kaaihn wrote:Timmah: I exactly answered the question. He asked how it should be written for librarians to sweep, but not terminators. As I said, that is what is currently written..

Timmah wrote:I'm confused but it sounds like you are agreeing that this is the correct way to write it to allow librarians in terminator armor to sweep but not terminators.

Nope. I am saying it is written that a Librarian can sweep, but a model equipped in terminator armour cannot. He didn't ask how it should be written for Librarians in terminator armour to be able to sweep, but non-librarians in terminator armour to not be able to. If I was to answer that question, the answer would be:

Leave the Wargear: Terminator Armour entry exactly as it is written. Add a statement to the Librarian entry that says "Librarians may always perform a sweeping advance, even if a piece of wargear would normally prevent it".

First and foremost, I thoroughly enjoyed reading this discussion so far so thank you to all who have participated and gave me something interesting to read while I was eating breakfast.

Honestly, I don't really have anything stellar to add since greater minds than mine have hashed out most of the possibilities already. However, I have plenty of off-topic comments! Hooray!

First, the 'rules lawyer' thing seems to be a cop-out. It's like saying 'noob' or something similar when you can't really think of anything better to say. Sure it's frustrating to argue with someone who absolutely WILL NOT BACK DOWN, but does that make them a 'rules lawyer' or does that just make them very staunch in their opinion? It is, after all, only an opinion since the game belongs to GW and they can say it means whatever the heck they like (if they ever get out of their giant gold coin swimming pools a la Scrooge McDuck and explain it) whether we think it makes sense or not. To be fair, in certain circumstances I think some people do end up being silly and holding on to a viewpoint that is quite clearly wrong just to cause strife. In other situations, like this one, the OP has a reasonably logical point and while it may be unpopular, I don't think he's just trying to be difficult for the sake of it.

To the people who say things like "ugh, why are we still discussing this?" or "I have better things to do than argue with you" (and then proceed to argue with them for 10 posts) I have to call BS. I would argue that there are really only two reasons for reading and posting on YMDC: 1) you're bored and want something to do, or 2) you're looking for entertainment (okay so if you're a particularly helpful maybe 3) you truly want to help people understand the rules) so why do people insist on making it seem like it's a HUGE chore to come online and argue with a random person on the internet? I seriously doubt anyone is going to be tremendously appreciative that you took time out of your busy day to post an argument about semantics. Especially not if you're complaining about it at the same time.

Oh and Terminators?

Well you know, I know, and the OP knows that anyone wearing Terminator Armour is a Terminator in the grand scheme of things, but there's no real way to prove it. I'd say you can be a Terminator and you can be a Librarian - they're not mutually exclusive - so you don't have to specify what the combined model is capable of unless it's NOT limited by something that would ordinarily limit one of its aspects. Just because he's a Terminator doesn't stop him from being limited to the same Psychic powers as a regular Librarian so why should being a Librarian stop him from being limited in the same way a Terminator is during Sweeping Advances? But, the rules aren't specific enough to squash ANY doubt, so the debate goes on...

Anyway, enough of my nonsense. You may now return to your regularly scheduled debating, thank you for your cooperation.

DoW

Nurglitch wrote:Sure, whenever you cite the passage that states "Tactical Space Marines move 6" in the Movement phase."

Thanks.

A correct inference is still RAW.

All infantry can move up to 6" in the movement phase.
Tactical Space Marines are infantry
Tactical Space Marines can move up to 6" in the movement phase.



The argument for terminator armour goes like this:

All terminators wear terminator armour
All units that wear terminator armour are terminators (fallacy)


See the problem/difference between the two inferences?

Other than you apparently random paranthetical, I do not.

I vote that people start reading the rules for what they are and stop trying to make them something they are NOT!

Timmah:

The difference is that you're mis-presenting the argument for Terminator Armour.

P1. All models equipped with Terminator Armour are Terminators.
P2. Terminators cannot perform sweeping advances.
P3 Librarians can be equipped with Terminator Armour
C. Librarians equipped with Terminator Armour cannot perform sweeping advances.

Wow. Why did they word it like that, did they want for the characters to be able to SA still? Accident?

Who knows, nothing in the errata.

P1. All models equipped with Terminator Armour are Terminators.

Where does it say this?
Its obvious that you believe this to be implied in the entry (which it is). However we play RAW not RAI.
You won't accept this simple fact for some reason.

Anyways Dog of War did a pretty good job of laying out the argument and unless someone comes up with something else I am out of this discussion.

(I might just have to bust out my librarian in terminator armour for fun at our next RTT)

@ Nurglitch, I'm not sure being a Terminator is the same thing as wearing terminator armor. The rule p.102 SM codex words it mostly in "models in terminator armor" but for SA it specifically says Terminators. It does not state any model in terminator armor counts as a terminator. I see it as either an accident or it could have even been intended I guess for characters to keep SA.

The third sentence under Terminator Armor:
". . . on every Terminator's shoulder plate. . ."

So character's in Termie armor get no invuln save?

I feel played now.

Sorry Yakface! I rose and I was silly.

kirsanth wrote:The third sentence under Terminator Armor:
". . . on every Terminator's shoulder plate. . ."

So character's in Termie armor get no invuln save?

very possible. I do not have the rule in front of me atm. But I believe it goes on to say:

..this grants models in terminator armour a 5+ invuln save.

However if it does not say something to this effect and just says terminators then I would agree that terminator armour alone does not give an invuln save.

Can anyone quote the full rule on this?

"Terminator" is used three times in the actual rules.

Exactly the same number of times as "models in Terminator armor"

"Tactical Dreadnaught Armor" is used once, and "Space Marine Terminator" once also.

Which ones do we ignore?

Terminator Armour, Armour, Wargear, Codex: Space Marines, p.102 wrote:Also known as Tactical Dreadnought armour, Terminator armour is the best protection a Space Marine can be equipped with. Designed for close-quarters fighting aboard Space Hulks and other confined areas. Terminator armour is capable of withstanding almost any attack. The ceramite plates can deflect most conventional assaults, whilst the Crux Terminatus on every Terminator's shoulder plate serves as a ward capable of turning aside even attacks from power weapons or melta fire. It is even said that Terminator armour can withstand the titanic energies at a plasma generator's core, and that this was in fact the armour's original purpose.

Due to the powerful exoskeleton and power sources built into their armour, models in Terminator armour have the relentless special rule.

On the other hand, this armour is somewhat cumbersome, so Space Marine Terminators are not able to pursue a more lightly armoured foe when they flee. Terminators cannot perform a Sweep Advance.

The above rules are titled "Terminator Armour". They are in the sub-section entitled "Armour" in the "Wargear" section of the book. Because it is in the Wargear section, it is not unique to Terminators ("where an item is not unique, it is detailed in the wargear seaction").

Let us begin with the first paragraph. It's background material. It gives Terminator Armour an alternate name ("Tactical Dreadnought armour"), and some pseudo-historical data. And it establishes that anyone wearing Terminator armour is a Terminator: "on every Terminator's shoulder plate".

The second paragraph states that the Relentless universal special rule applies to all models "in" Terminator Armour. A model in Terminator Armour is a model that is equipped with Terminator Armour. The text is thus discussing the rules that apply to models equipped with Terminator Armour, such as Terminators, Assault Terminators, and occasionally Librarians.

The third paragraph opens with the expression "On the other hand", so in addition to the advantage of Relentless, models in Terminator armour have a disadvantage. Now we encounter the term "Space Marine Terminators", though not for the first time because the first paragraph has informed us that Space Marines equipped with Terminator Armour are Terminators. The reference to Space Marine Terminators merely reiterates and concatenates what we already know that there are Space Marines who wear Terminator Armour and that are called Terminators. The author then dispenses with such a complex term and shortens the term to Terminators again.

kirsanth wrote:"Terminator" is used three times in the actual rules.

Exactly the same number of times as "models in Terminator armor"

"Tactical Dreadnaught Armor" is used once, and "Space Marine Terminator" once also.

Which ones do we ignore?

You ignore none of them. Any model equipped with Wargear: Terminator Armour is now associated to all the descriptors given to it in the Wargear: Terminator Armour rules.

This means that where a rule states "terminators, "space marine terminators", and "tactical dreadnought armor", it applies to any model that is equipped with the wargear of Terminator Armour.

Simple language tells us that models equipped in Terminator armour are indeed "Terminators", because that descriptor is associated in the rules for that particular wargear. See Nurglitch's nice language lesson above for details.

Nurglitch you have yet to quote anything that shows every unit wearing terminator armor is a terminator.

You keep summarizing and saying it means that.
This is not a good basis for rulings.

I have quoted it repeatedly.

Timmah wrote:Nurglitch you have yet to quote anything that shows every unit wearing terminator armor is a terminator.

You keep summarizing and saying it means that.
This is not a good basis for rulings.

You amaze me...Why are you trying to twist the rules?

Nurglitch wrote:I have quoted it repeatedly.

Well I'm having trouble finding it. Please just quote the entire passage and give a page number that supports your argument once more. (no summary, none of your own thoughts)

ShawnSum wrote:

You amaze me...Why are you trying to twist the rules?

Another attack on me for discussing something in a rules discussion forum.
This is new and interesting.

Terminator Armour, Armour, Wargear, Codex: Space Marines, p.102 wrote:Also known as Tactical Dreadnought armour, Terminator armour is the best protection a Space Marine can be equipped with. Designed for close-quarters fighting aboard Space Hulks and other confined areas. Terminator armour is capable of withstanding almost any attack. The ceramite plates can deflect most conventional assaults, whilst the Crux Terminatus on every Terminator's shoulder plate serves as a ward capable of turning aside even attacks from power weapons or melta fire. It is even said that Terminator armour can withstand the titanic energies at a plasma generator's core, and that this was in fact the armour's original purpose.

Due to the powerful exoskeleton and power sources built into their armour, models in Terminator armour have the relentless special rule.

On the other hand, this armour is somewhat cumbersome, so Space Marine Terminators are not able to pursue a more lightly armoured foe when they flee. Terminators cannot perform a Sweep Advance.

Equipment, Forces of the Space Marines, Codex: Space Marines, p.51 wrote:When an item is unique, it is detailed in the following entry for its owner, and where an item is not unique, it is detailed in the wargear section.

Nurglitch wrote:

Terminator Armour, Armour, Wargear, Codex: Space Marines, p.102 wrote:Also known as Tactical Dreadnought armour, Terminator armour is the best protection a Space Marine can be equipped with. Designed for close-quarters fighting aboard Space Hulks and other confined areas. Terminator armour is capable of withstanding almost any attack. The ceramite plates can deflect most conventional assaults, whilst the Crux Terminatus on every Terminator's shoulder plate serves as a ward capable of turning aside even attacks from power weapons or melta fire. It is even said that Terminator armour can withstand the titanic energies at a plasma generator's core, and that this was in fact the armour's original purpose.

Due to the powerful exoskeleton and power sources built into their armour, models in Terminator armour have the relentless special rule.

On the other hand, this armour is somewhat cumbersome, so Space Marine Terminators are not able to pursue a more lightly armoured foe when they flee. Terminators cannot perform a Sweep Advance.

Equipment, Forces of the Space Marines, Codex: Space Marines, p.51 wrote:When an item is unique, it is detailed in the following entry for its owner, and where an item is not unique, it is detailed in the wargear section.

Again, nothing in there states that all models wearing terminator armor are terminators.
Wargear can have different rules or omitted rules depending on whos using it, nothing says all wargear functions exactly the same no matter who is wearing it.

It does state:
"whilst the Crux Terminatus on every Terminator's shoulder plate serves as a ward capable of turning aside even attacks from power weapons or melta fire."

So you have proven that all terminators have a Crux Terminatus on their shoulders.

Also you have proven:
On the other hand, this armour is somewhat cumbersome, so Space Marine Terminators are not able to pursue a more lightly armoured foe when they flee. Terminators cannot perform a Sweep Advance.

Somewhat cumbersome. How do you know GW didn't intend for IC's to be so great that the armour doesn't hinder their movements? They are remarkable individuals after all.

The fact is, with current wording, its only the actual elite terminators that can't SA.

kirsanth wrote:"Terminator" is used three times in the actual rules.

Exactly the same number of times as "models in Terminator armor"

"Tactical Dreadnaught Armor" is used once, and "Space Marine Terminator" once also.

Which ones do we ignore?

I'm pretty sure my so called "attack" was a question...

kirsanth wrote:

kirsanth wrote:"Terminator" is used three times in the actual rules.

Exactly the same number of times as "models in Terminator armor"

"Tactical Dreadnaught Armor" is used once, and "Space Marine Terminator" once also.

Which ones do we ignore?

You use all 3. Terminator armor refers to any unit wearing said armor.
Terminators refer to the troops named thusly (because there is no defined term for this)
and TDA is not ever used in the actual rules, but only the fluff so it is not important.

Sorry Shawn, I assumed you were trying to insult/attack me.

I raised this point because its an interesting situation with grey area in it. I came across a little harsh in my OP and have tried to refine my argument since then. I believe its good that the community bring these grey area's to light so that GW can write better/clearer rules in the future.

I personally believe a lot of the community tries to sweep these issues under the rug and not deal with them. This should not be happening. GW should write clear rules for this game we play. It's not impossible. I know of plenty of games that have a clearly defined ruleset and interactions never get questions. (for instance, magic the gathering, which is far more complex in its rule system with thousands of different cards ect. Yet rules questions are always swiftly answered and clear cut. There is no grey area.

There were four example names used.

And all were in the same rules section defining Terminator Armor.

Well, I have nothing more to say in this thread then. The rules are clear, and if Timmah is either unwilling or unable to notice that, nothing I can say or do will change his mind.

If you don't find that the rules clearly state that models equipped with Terminator Armour are Terminators, maybe this game just isn't your speed.