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.

mrblacksunshine_1978 wrote:Remember that the codex will always ibecorrect and will always over rule the rules from the 40k rule book.

No. Specific>general, not codex>rule book. As nos has already pointed out, power weapons wouldn't work otherwise.

The way I see it, there are three ways to look at the levels of specificness for CC attacks from least to most specific.

Wolf Lords perspective 1
Regular close combat attacks
Attacks with Grenades
Attacks with Grenades and WTN

Wolf Lords perspective 2
Regular close combat attacks
Attacks with CC weapons and WTN
Attacks with Grenades and WTN

Dreadnaught perspective
Regular close combat attacks
Attacks with Grenades
Attacks from CC weapons and WTN
Attacks with Grenades and WTN

Depending on how you look at it, either way can win out as by the RAW of both rules, they both apply. Unfortunately, the starting point to determine the specificness of a rule is not defined in the BRB so it is up for interpretation. Do we start with the Wolf Lord or the Dreadnaught? If you start with the Wolf Lord, how do you determine if grenades are more specific than weapon attacks? He comes equipped with grenades and CC weapons in his base wargear, so always has a choice of weapon or grenade attacks. There is no rule in the BRB to address this. In two of the three cases above, the WTN would win out but that is hardly concrete evidence one way or the other. It is best to treat this as two rules that both apply by RAW, so just D6 it to see which wins out in each assault phase. I think that was GW's solution in a FAQ for 4th edition where one rule said you always hit on 3's and the other said they could only be hit on 6's (i forget which codex this was for but it had nothing to do with walkers).

That was the old Dark eldar with harewire generade could be used if the dreadnought was immoblized, that was a more specific ruling

wolvesoffenris wrote:The way I see it, there are three ways to look at the levels of specificness for CC attacks from least to most specific.

Wolf Lords perspective 1
Regular close combat attacks
Attacks with Grenades
Attacks with Grenades and WTN

Wolf Lords perspective 2
Regular close combat attacks
Attacks with CC weapons and WTN
Attacks with Grenades and WTN

Dreadnaught perspective
Regular close combat attacks
Attacks with Grenades
Attacks from CC weapons and WTN
Attacks with Grenades and WTN

Depending on how you look at it, either way can win out as by the RAW of both rules, they both apply. Unfortunately, the starting point to determine the specificness of a rule is not defined in the BRB so it is up for interpretation. Do we start with the Wolf Lord or the Dreadnaught? If you start with the Wolf Lord, how do you determine if grenades are more specific than weapon attacks? He comes equipped with grenades and CC weapons in his base wargear, so always has a choice of weapon or grenade attacks. There is no rule in the BRB to address this. In two of the three cases above, the WTN would win out but that is hardly concrete evidence one way or the other. It is best to treat this as two rules that both apply by RAW, so just D6 it to see which wins out in each assault phase. I think that was GW's solution in a FAQ for 4th edition where one rule said you always hit on 3's and the other said they could only be hit on 6's (i forget which codex this was for but it had nothing to do with walkers).

this sums it up for me really, both sides of the argument you can make a strong case for being correct. So rolling off seems the only way. Ho hum.

mrblacksunshine_1978 wrote:That was the old Dark eldar with harewire generade could be used if the dreadnought was immoblized, that was a more specific ruling

I looked it up and I believe I was thinking of the old distract dire avenger power. The official GW faq was to dice off. I could be wrong though as it has been quite a while.

So if, say, a Lascannon said -

"On a successful roll to hit, remove the target model from play"

Would you claim it doesn't work when it hit a Land Raider, because the rules for striking a vehicle's armor facings are "more specific"? Would it prevent the weapon from working?

Furthermore, if you can make a successful argument for specificity in any case, does it allow you to ignore wargear whenever you want?