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.

So your claims that my argument is that you get to move twice wasnt a strawman? Really? What about your other logical fallacies, ignoring them as well?

It wasn't a strawman it was what you were saying. You said each unit has it's own movement phase in which they can move. Now I also know each unit can move in my movement phase hence each unit moves twice. Either that or you're naming the section of the movement phase where the unit moves as that unit's movement, in which case you need to point to the section of where in the rulebook we are told this. You can't do the later therefore you must be claiming the former or you are just arguing for the sake of it.

Hence why you changed tack to claim that by "beginning of the Librarians movement phase" (6 words, 42 characters) they instead meant "before the librarian moves" (just 4 words, 26 characters), meaning they typed out the best part of double the letters to make a sentence far more confusing...

Or by Librarian's movement phase they meant the movement phase of the Librarian. The only movement phase that is ever talked about in the rulebook and the movement phase in which the Librarian can take his actions...

Which is the biggest stretch? One changes the entire meaning of the phrase and largely ignores all but 1 word, the other is a direct RaW translation of the text.

No, it is a strawman as yuo are making up an argument I did not posit. Your ability to leap into entirely different arguments is impressive, but still a fallacy.

AS for your argumetn vis redundancy - why do they both typing out the entire rule regarding modifiers and ID under the Chaos SM Bike entry? In other words an argument based on sentence length and characters (well done, you can count) is not exactly compelling.

What is the biggest stretch? Trhat they didnt mean the Librarian SPECIFICALLY, despite stating this, or that they did? Oh, and you dont have a "RAW" argument, you have a "if I changed the words to mean something different" argument. Or will this be another repeat of your contention that the rules /= the rules as written?

Trhat they didnt mean the Librarian SPECIFICALLY, despite stating this, or that they did? Oh, and you dont have a "RAW" argument, you have a "if I changed the words to mean something different" argument.

No they did mean Librarian specifically as in his Movement phase specifically rather than the enemies.

You're the one who's assuming by specifically stating Movement phase they didn't mean movement phase, they meant a small part of a movement phase. I actually do have a RaW argument where as you quite clearly do not.

So when they wrote Librarians movement phase they actually meant Owning Players movement phase? THe librarian does not HAVE a movement phase, the army does. You have also contradicted yourself quite neatly by stating "his" movement phase - I thought it was agreed that Units dont have a movement phase of their own?

I have already stated I have a muddy RAW arguement, same as you, but strict RAW GoI does not work - which you had agreed to. Or are you going back on that?

Yesterday I came across another tiny thing...

I used a libby in a drop pod. Wanted to use Force Dome wich also states "at the beginning of the librarians movement phase". So when do I cast the Force Dome? At the beginning of my turn, when the drop pod isnt even on the table, or after they disembarked (but then he allready moved!). Same thing with a libby in a rhino coming from reserves.

I would say you are not able to use it, since you must immediately disembark, you have no choice in the matter. As such, it's too late to use Force Dome.

You certainly cannot use it when he is in reserves.

ChairmanMeow wrote: So when do I cast the Force Dome? At the beginning of my turn, when the drop pod isnt even on the table, or after they disembarked (but then he allready moved!). Same thing with a libby in a rhino coming from reserves.

In either case, you would have to wait until the following turn to cast it.

So when they wrote Librarians movement phase they actually meant Owning Players movement phase? THe librarian does not HAVE a movement phase, the army does. You have also contradicted yourself quite neatly by stating "his" movement phase - I thought it was agreed that Units dont have a movement phase of their own?

As pointed out he doesn't have a movement phase of his own that is distinct from his player's or army's movement phase. But he still has a movement phase. I think putting librarian (or whatever unit) or controlling player is fairly interchangeable in the rules. Look at the rules for Warptime, are you suggesting that the model itself has to make the rerolls? This is just following that well established pattern.

I have already stated I have a muddy RAW arguement, same as you, but strict RAW GoI does not work - which you had agreed to. Or are you going back on that?

You don't have a RaW argument full stop. It is not muddy it is simply not RaW at all. Both the arguement that the GoI does nothing and my argument are equally valid RaW interpretations. So what makes more sense have the rule do nothing or have it work? Or make up a totally different rule from what is written?

SO you arent agreeing that RAW it doesnt work, given you state it does and does not work at the same time.

You keep stating, erroneously, that you have a RAW argument. Stop. you dont. THis has been shown repeatedly, your repeated attempts to ignore this again are no help to your argument. Such as it is.

Anyway, I think this is done: RAW GoI does NOT work. Either decide to follow the intuitive way, that was used at GT UK 2009 with no complaint (at least one heat) and backed by TOs there, or follow your way.

SO you arent agreeing that RAW it doesnt work, given you state it does and does not work at the same time.

You keep stating, erroneously, that you have a RAW argument. Stop. you dont. THis has been shown repeatedly, your repeated attempts to ignore this again are no help to your argument. Such as it is.

I've stated both my interpretation and the interpretation that GoI are both valid RaW interpretations. How is that difficult to understand?

How is your way intuitive? You keep claiming this when it is nothing of the sort. My way is the natural way the language tells you to play. Now you can try to hone down the specifics of the language to make it not work at all, buthat doesn't stop mine from being a natural literal translation of the text. Making stuff up on the spot that has almost nothing to do with what iss written is in no way intuitive...

You have stated you have a working RAW interpretation. You do not. How is that difficult to understand?

Anyway - this is done with. It is more intuitive as shown by actual play. That is a far better indicator, to me, than someone who cant tell what is rules and what is fluff in a codex, despite directions on how to do this being within the codex...

You have stated you have a working RAW interpretation. You do not. How is that difficult to understand?

But I do as I've pointed out. Just saying my argument isn't RaW doesn't stop it from being so. Give me a counter argument that holds up and then you might get somewhere.

It is more intuitive as shown by actual play. That is a far better indicator, to me, than someone who cant tell what is rules and what is fluff in a codex, despite directions on how to do this being within the codex...

Everyone I know plays it with my interpretation as do many others on this forum. I know the codex says there's fluff at the start and then each unit is described with their rules. It is in the part where a unit is described with their rules that I was saying I couldn't by RaW distinguish between fluff and rules.

This is well and truly going around in circles at this point. Moving on.