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.

hemingway wrote:@ dswanick: you're completely correct, in my estimation. I'm not sure what is so complicated about this. The monolith can move and fire, period. Are the same people saying the monolith can't move and fire ('because it doesn't specify cruising speed.' give me a break) going to tell me destroyers can't move and fire, too? The codex says specifically states destroyers can move and fire, just like it specifically says monoliths can move and fire. But since it doesn't say destroyers can move at cruising speed and fire, I guess destroyers are stationary heavy support, and good luck making that stick at your tournament.

1. Destroyers are not vehicles.
2. Destroyers count as jetbikes for movememt purposes.
3 The Necron codex allows destroyers to move and fire their (heavy) gauss cannons, whith other fast attack units cannot do unless they have relentless.
4. Necron destroyers and their rules have nothing whatever to do with Monolith rules.

hemingway wrote:1. 19 year olds can drink alcoholic beverages.
2. Johnny is 19 years old.
3. Johnny can't drink Jack Daniels.

/facepalm.

That isn't what we are arguing at all.


We are arguing:
The Monolith can Move and Fire.
Vehicle who move Cruising Speed Cannot fire.
The Monolith Cannot move Cruising Speed and fire.

It has 2 rules in effect.

1 says you can fire, one says you can't.

The 1st doesn't say it overrides the 2nd, so it doesn't.

Humm I'm not convinced that there is a clear way to interpret this.

The monolith rules state it can move and fire. Since moving at cruising speed is still moving, the statement includes all speeds of movement.

However, its not clear whether the rules restricting shooting on cruising speed movement are more specific than the monolith's rules.

The monolith's rules are more specific in which models it applies to, but the cruising speed rules are more specific in the speed of movement.

Both interpretations have equal validity IMO.

Dracos wrote:Humm I'm not convinced that there is a clear way to interpret this.

The monolith rules state it can move and fire. Since moving at cruising speed is still moving, the statement includes all speeds of movement.

However, its not clear whether the rules restricting shooting on cruising speed movement are more specific than the monolith's rules.

The monolith's rules are more specific in which models it applies to, but the cruising speed rules are more specific in the speed of movement.

Both interpretations have equal validity IMO.

And now is the time that someone comes in with the typical argument of "which method has you breaking more rules? That is the wrong one." defense. Which is also a flawed defense as there are many exceptions to many rules in this game.

And to gwar, so you can't move cruising speed and fire ordnance but when deep striking it only "counts as" moving cruising speed, it didn't actually move cruising speed. Ya know, if you really want to get into the nitty gritty of semantic arguments of which words are used in what sentences to describe situations.

Kevin949 wrote:And to gwar, so you can't move cruising speed and fire ordnance but when deep striking it only "counts as" moving cruising speed, it didn't actually move cruising speed. Ya know, if you really want to get into the nitty gritty of semantic arguments of which words are used in what sentences to describe situations.

...

So, if it "counts as" moving cruising speed, it can't fire, because for all intents and purposes it moved cruising speed.

That's what "counts as" means you know...

We are arguing:
The Monolith can Move and Fire. codex
Vehicle who move Cruising Speed Cannot fire.BRB

codex > brb

doesn't matter if it 'counts as'. necron codex says move and fire. move could be 1mm, move could be 56" across the table diagonally. monolith moves, monolith can fire. If you're going to say the monolith can't port and particle whip, then you have to try and say destroyers can't move and fire, and also monoliths can't teleport and port necron units in (because they all follow the same rules: codex says move and shoot, move and use power matrix. there's not any ifs ands or buts about it). Which is preposterous, and goes against the codex as written as well as, I think, the rules as intended.

i know people hate getting their russes pie-plated by deep striking monoliths, but suck it up. necrons are gimp. the reasons monoliths cost a lot isn't so that they can be useless.

1) Don't Edit quotes without pointing it out. Very Rude.

2) We are not arguing Codex > Rulebook, mainly because it isn't true. What we are arguing is Specific > General, which is true (if it wasn't then power weapons wouldn't work). The more specific rule (Move Cruising Speed = can't fire) wins against the general rule (You can Move and fire).

Hemingway - you do realise destroyers arent Vehicles, and therefore rules which restrict VEHICLES have no bearing on them?

Stop creating a strawman argument. Doesnt help.

RAW: Monoliths cannot fire when they deepstrike.

As for the Shield of Sanguinius answer - you will notice that the FAQ STILL does NOT state that they can *use* the Shield. Just that they have the cover save. Also, remember FAQs arent actual rules, they did not errata it to state that vehicles count as obscured, which is what is needed.

Gwar! wrote:

Kevin949 wrote:And to gwar, so you can't move cruising speed and fire ordnance but when deep striking it only "counts as" moving cruising speed, it didn't actually move cruising speed. Ya know, if you really want to get into the nitty gritty of semantic arguments of which words are used in what sentences to describe situations.

...

So, if it "counts as" moving cruising speed, it can't fire, because for all intents and purposes it moved cruising speed.

That's what "counts as" means you know...

Surely you see the humor in this entire situation and how neither side will give because neither side believes their wrong.

And yes, gwar, I know that's what it means, I was just deliberately being a smarta** for comedy purposes mostly to illustrate that either side can get as granular as they want on this subject and make the wording of either side of the rules work for them.

The difference is, of course, that our side is actually right from a RaW standpoint and a "Rules as possibly Intended" standpoint too, considering WHY the Monolith has this God-Emperor Forsaken rule in the first place!

Except you didnt make the wording work for you, at all. Which was the point.

The "I can fire" side are wrong because they are relying on codex > rulebook, which is incorrect. A false premise leads to a false conclusion, in this case...

Hm...and here I thought I get you to stray from the "but we're right so nyah!" attitude. Silly me. *Sigh*

And I mean that in a purely conversation context, not in a "making you see our side" context.

Except that isnt what we are saynig, so SIGH at your inability to accurately represent arguments.

SIGH.

Hey Nos...just because you fail to see it doesn't mean it didn't happen.

Hey Kevin, just because you dont see your mis-characterisation, doesnt mean it didnt happen.

The cannot fire side is right because it follows the rules of the game. Doesnt get much simpler than that, really, but belive whatever you can delude yourself into thinking is correct - noone can stop you.

nosferatu1001 wrote:Hemingway - you do realise destroyers arent Vehicles, and therefore rules which restrict VEHICLES have no bearing on them?

Stop creating a strawman argument. Doesnt help.

RAW: Monoliths cannot fire when they deepstrike.

Not a strawman, because they both have rules stating, specifically and without equivocation, in the codex, in their respective entries, that they can move and fire. What I'm saying is that if you're going to make an argument that completely disregards the codex entries on a subject, you should do try to ignore it on a universal scale. The idea, of course, is pointing out how preposterous simply ignoring the text in the codex is to prop up an argument which attempts to nurf an already red-headed stepchild army.

hemingway wrote:Not a strawman, because they both have rules stating, specifically and without equivocation, in the codex, in their respective entries, that they can move and fire. What I'm saying is that if you're going to make an argument that completely disregards the codex entries on a subject, you should do try to ignore it on a universal scale. The idea, of course, is pointing out how preposterous simply ignoring the text in the codex is to prop up an argument which attempts to nurf an already red-headed stepchild army.

Again, Being able to move and fire does not allow you to move cruising speed and fire. It simply lets you fire if you have moved, which everything can do now.

The Lith needed that rule in 3rd because all Ordnance was a Move or Fire affair.

hemingway - yes, it IS a strawman because they arent vehicles, and thus do not have a specific rule regarding how far they have moved and whether they can fire.

Codex > Basic Rulebook - is not RAW. (Or power weapons would not work).
Specific > General - is not RAW. (Or Shield of Sanguinius would not work).
I'm not supposed to quote "The most important rule" in a discussion in YMTC, so 'nough said.

The rule states : A monolith may use it's power matrix in one of two ways, even if it moved. One of the ways it may use the power matrix is as a power whip.
If you argue that the Codex > Rulebook, then slam dunk - the particle whip can be used when it deep strikes. Unless you're arguing that moving cruising speed isn't moving (I did not have sexual relations with that woman...)
If you're arguing that the Specific > General, the slam dunk - the monolith is more specific than vehicles and the power matrix/particle whip is more specific than weapon. Unless you're arguing that the rule is invalid because moved is not more specific than moved at cruising speed, in which case I refer you to the GW Blood Angels FAQ entry for Shield of Sanguinius.

Moving at cruising speed is more specific, that has been the argument from the start.

Shield of Sanguinius gives a cover save. The FAQ does not say it can be used, as you have already been told, and either way would not refute the point made. So two strikes against that argument working.

nosferatu1001 wrote:Moving at cruising speed is more specific, that has been the argument from the start.

Shield of Sanguinius gives a cover save. The FAQ does not say it can be used, as you have already been told, and either way would not refute the point made. So two strikes against that argument working.

You're kidding right?

GW Blood Angels FAQ wrote:Q: Do vehicles gain a cover save from Shield of Sanguinius?
A: Yes.

You're actually arguing that this means that a vehicle gets a cover save, but can't use the cover save it gets? bwawhahahahahahahahaha

dswanick wrote:

nosferatu1001 wrote:Moving at cruising speed is more specific, that has been the argument from the start.

Shield of Sanguinius gives a cover save. The FAQ does not say it can be used, as you have already been told, and either way would not refute the point made. So two strikes against that argument working.

You're kidding right?

GW Blood Angels FAQ wrote:Q: Do vehicles gain a cover save from Shield of Sanguinius?
A: Yes.

You're actually arguing that this means that a vehicle gets a cover save, but can't use the cover save it gets? bwawhahahahahahahahaha

Yes. This is perfectly fine.

It's the same situation when 1/3 kans are within range of a KFF. I don't see what's so funny about this?

Gwar! wrote:

dswanick wrote:

nosferatu1001 wrote:Moving at cruising speed is more specific, that has been the argument from the start.

Shield of Sanguinius gives a cover save. The FAQ does not say it can be used, as you have already been told, and either way would not refute the point made. So two strikes against that argument working.

You're kidding right?

GW Blood Angels FAQ wrote:Q: Do vehicles gain a cover save from Shield of Sanguinius?
A: Yes.

You're actually arguing that this means that a vehicle gets a cover save, but can't use the cover save it gets? bwawhahahahahahahahaha

Yes. This is perfectly fine.

It's the same situation when 1/3 kans are within range of a KFF. I don't see what's so funny about this?

Bwahahahahahahahaha
This is why B&CS has more members than this site.

Huh?

B&C have more members because people on Dakka play 40k by the rules?

dswanick - yes, using is different to having. I thpought we'd mentioned this the first time you brought up the entirely irrelevant SoS "point"

If you dont like it here, then I'm sure B&CS would be happy to have you. Understanding the, and playing with *if you want or agree otherwise*, rules seems to be a sensible reason to be here...

It can fire when it moves... the speed is irrelevant as it's all moving. Anyway IIRC a mono only moves 6" anyway

Descent into silliness complete. Moving on.