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.

Grey Templar wrote:Nope, nothing there saying it stops Swooping.

Because the rulebook makes a distinction between a Swooping Flying Monstrous Creature and a Grounded Flying Monstrous Creature.

So you cannot have a Grounded Swooping Flying Monstrous Creature.

Why not?

FMCs are either Swooping or Gliding. They can't be in any other state of movement.

Grey Templar wrote:Why not?

FMCs are either Swooping or Gliding. They can't be in any other state of movement.

Because the Grounded rules say "... and become Grounded. A Grounded Flying Monstrous Creature ..."
If they were still swooping that sentence would have to begin "... Grounded. A grounded Flying Monstrous Creature ..." Using the capital version means it's removing any qualifiers that were already there and replacing them with it's own.

And yes, they can only be in one of those two states of movement, but there's nothing saying that those are the only two states ever.
Grounded is a state.

It doesn't need to say its Swooping for it to be Swooping.

A grounded MC is obvious one thats failed its Grounding test. Nowhere in the rules does it say failing the Grounding test makes it no longer swooping. Admit it, you cannot disproove this.


For the record, I agree that it should remove swooping. But it doesn't. You have nothing.

Grey Templar wrote:A grounded MC is obvious one thats failed its Grounding test. Nowhere in the rules does it say failing the Grounding test makes it no longer swooping.

Re-reading again...

A swooping FMC is referred to as "A Flying Monstrous Creature that is Swooping".
When grounded, you're a "Grounded Flying Monstrous Creature" not a "Flying Monstrous Creature that is Grounded".
There's nothing that says you cannot be a "Grounded Flying Monstrous Creature that is Swooping."

That's the semantic argument. I'm going to bow out of the discussion now because it's getting insane and my viewpoint is useless and becoming biased.

rigeld2 wrote:

Grey Templar wrote:Nope, nothing there saying it stops Swooping.

Because the rulebook makes a distinction between a Swooping Flying Monstrous Creature and a Grounded Flying Monstrous Creature.

So you cannot have a Grounded Swooping Flying Monstrous Creature.

This actually opens up a much bigger can of worms.
Only once (under the Hard to Hit rule) is there a mention of a Swooping Flying Monstrous creature. All the other entries state "a Flying Monstrous Creature that is Swooping".
So IF we assume A Swooping Flying monstrous Creature is a type, and that it is renamed to Grounded Flying Monstrous Creature on a failed grounded test, and further since there is no listed parameters of UNDOING the type change, since it does not revert at the end of a phase or turn, we must assume either
A) It is never considered to follow the Hard to Hit rule for the rest of the game
or
B) The Grounded type is not exclusionary (similar to the Jump unit type), and it does not remove the Swooping rule

Alternatively, we could also consider that since a "Swooping Flying Monstrous Creature" is an undefined unit type, a Flying Monstrous Creature that is swooping never benefits from the Hard to Hit rule at all.

I think I need to get myself a drink.

TheRedDevil wrote: I think I need to get myself a drink.

Exactly where I was headed. And it's not even 1pm.

Essentially, taking the semantic argument and applying it to the rule book as a whole fails. SFMC's don't exist. FMCtaS exist. GFMCs exist. There's no mention of GFMCtaS.
FMCtaS aren't Hard to Hit - SFMCs are.

Therefore SFMCs and FMCtaS must be the same thing.
Therefore a GFMC replaces a SFMC.

You know, its topics like this that mean I no longer have to watch TV to get entertainment.

Honestly I can see everyones view point and they all make sense in their own way. Personally I'm in the camp that says they are no longer swooping as they've hit the ground but that's just me using my common sense to try and work out what the fudge GW are trying to write.

You would think GW would have gotten it together by now wouldn't you? Maybe they should get Dakka to proof read all their future publifications? XD

LynxSarnage wrote:You know, its topics like this that mean I no longer have to watch TV to get entertainment.

Honestly I can see everyones view point and they all make sense in their own way. Personally I'm in the camp that says they are no longer swooping as they've hit the ground but that's just me using my common sense to try and work out what the fudge GW are trying to write.

You would think GW would have gotten it together by now wouldn't you? Maybe they should get Dakka to proof read all their future publifications? XD

It took millions of people millions of games to spot this single poorly worded rule.
GW will never have the resources to play test on that scale.
The most important thing is that all of this is pointless - no one would ever try to claim that their FMC is still swooping after being grounded.

The way the gamers at my FLGS and I responded to this was if a FMC has swooped in his movement phase and is shot down, he is still moving at swooping speeds as he is crashing to the ground, and he hits the ground as the assault phase comes around. So snapfire shots are still required to hit this monster as its crashing, and the FMC can't use jink saves as it cant control itself as its crashing. which is similar to fast vehicles gaining cover in the last edition.

Thats what my thinking is.

Now, I originally thought they meant the FMC is no longer swooping. But then I thought of that exact situation.

They specifically singled out Assaulting and the Jink save. Not anything else associated with being a FMC in Swoop mode.


Not even GW is dumb enough to mess this up. They could have just said "The FMC no longer counts as Swooping when it is Grounded although it may swoop again next turn"

That would have done what is currently be arguing as RAI.

But they were very specific about what Grounding does. Hence my position.

By letter of the rules a FMC wouldn't lose its 'Hard to Hit' rule. Being Grounded only means that it can be Charged and loses its Jink rule.

That said I have played about a dozen games of 6th so far and I play it although I lose the Hard to Hit rule when I fail a Grounded test.

Signed: Regular user of 5 FMCs.

Grey Templar wrote:Not even GW is dumb enough to mess this up.

Yes.

Yes they are.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

darickrp wrote:The way the gamers at my FLGS and I responded to this was if a FMC has swooped in his movement phase and is shot down, he is still moving at swooping speeds as he is crashing to the ground, and he hits the ground as the assault phase comes around. So snapfire shots are still required to hit this monster as its crashing, and the FMC can't use jink saves as it cant control itself as its crashing. which is similar to fast vehicles gaining cover in the last edition.

So, you are saying that the FMC would have to take as many str 9 hits for as many grounding tests as it failed? So unit 1 hits it, does not wound, but it fails its grounding test. Unit 2 then shoots, it fails test again. Repear for 9 more units?

Green is Best! wrote:

Grey Templar wrote:Not even GW is dumb enough to mess this up.

Yes.

Yes they are.

So you'd like to see GW impliment play testing roughly equal to the combined total of all games played during the past fortnight? That'd take centuries.

Green is Best! wrote:
So, you are saying that the FMC would have to take as many str 9 hits for as many grounding tests as it failed? So unit 1 hits it, does not wound, but it fails its grounding test. Unit 2 then shoots, it fails test again. Repear for 9 more units?

It takes one test for each unit that hits it. UNIT, not model or shot.

Testify wrote:So you'd like to see GW impliment play testing roughly equal to the combined total of all games played during the past fortnight? That'd take centuries.

No. I would like to see them at least have someone thoroughly screen their rules for ambiguity. The list of examples from GW go well beyond this. I

Testify wrote:
It takes one test for each unit that hits it. UNIT, not model or shot.

That is what I said. Every unit that hits it causes the FMC to take a grounding test. So, if 10 units shoot at it and it fails 10 times, you are taking 10 str 9 hits? This is according to what previous posters are claiming.

My contention has been once you're grounded, you stop taking this test. But, it appears the rules lawyers have won this round because of poor rules writing by GW. See above.

It's also why strict literal reading of the rules inevitably fails- GW simple don't write their rules with that level of specificity. Heck, the most important rule is that the rules aren't that important. So the answer is it doesn't matter. Just fly the model around and shout "PEW PEW!"

I think the rule meant for the FMC to be forced into Glide Mode.

Although I kind of like the idea of my Str 3 lasguns forcing a half dozen Str 9 armor ignoring hits.

Green is Best! wrote:

Testify wrote:So you'd like to see GW impliment play testing roughly equal to the combined total of all games played during the past fortnight? That'd take centuries.

No. I would like to see them at least have someone thoroughly screen their rules for ambiguity. The list of examples from GW go well beyond this.

I can't even imagine the cost this would require, not to mention if it was even feasible. I've read fandexes that are written so as to avoid any ambiguity whatsoever, and the end result is that each paragraph is about twice as long as it should be and generally unreadable.

Green is Best! wrote:
That is what I said. Every unit that hits it causes the FMC to take a grounding test. So, if 10 units shoot at it and it fails 10 times, you are taking 10 str 9 hits? This is according to what previous posters are claiming.

My contention has been once you're grounded, you stop taking this test. But, it appears the rules lawyers have won this round because of poor rules writing by GW. See above.

Considering it's "poorly written", 99% of gamers don't have a problem understanding it.

"If a flying monstrous creature that is swooping suffers one or more hits from a unit's Shooting attack, it must make a Grounded test immediately after that shooting attack has been resolved".
That's very clear, though I can see how you'd miss it if you were skimming.

Testify wrote:

Green is Best! wrote:

Testify wrote:So you'd like to see GW impliment play testing roughly equal to the combined total of all games played during the past fortnight? That'd take centuries.

No. I would like to see them at least have someone thoroughly screen their rules for ambiguity. The list of examples from GW go well beyond this.

I can't even imagine the cost this would require, not to mention if it was even feasible. I've read fandexes that are written so as to avoid any ambiguity whatsoever, and the end result is that each paragraph is about twice as long as it should be and generally unreadable.

Green is Best! wrote:
That is what I said. Every unit that hits it causes the FMC to take a grounding test. So, if 10 units shoot at it and it fails 10 times, you are taking 10 str 9 hits? This is according to what previous posters are claiming.

My contention has been once you're grounded, you stop taking this test. But, it appears the rules lawyers have won this round because of poor rules writing by GW. See above.

Considering it's "poorly written", 99% of gamers don't have a problem understanding it.

"If a flying monstrous creature that is swooping suffers one or more hits from a unit's Shooting attack, it must make a Grounded test immediately after that shooting attack has been resolved".
That's very clear, though I can see how you'd miss it if you were skimming.

I don't think it would be very expensive to hire say, 5 or 6 experienced gamers to read the rules and playtest them from a rules lawyer kind of view. Basically, ask them to break the game wherever possible or try to find spots where things become fuzzy. Given the ridiculous amount of money GW takes from us, I don't think it is much to ask for. Additionally, if you were to ask 40k players what is their biggest gripe about the game is, I think you would have a toss up between "Matt Ward written codexes" and "ambiguously written rules." This is not the first case of rules having issues. Given this is what they do as a business, you would think they could implement some quality control.

As for the grounding test, I still don't understand your point. Most people seem to agree that once you are grounded, you stop taking the grounding test. However, based on the fact that there is nothing specifically stating you are not swooping, you could potentially be forced to take grounding tests even though you have already been grounded.

Testify wrote:

Green is Best! wrote:
That is what I said. Every unit that hits it causes the FMC to take a grounding test. So, if 10 units shoot at it and it fails 10 times, you are taking 10 str 9 hits? This is according to what previous posters are claiming.

My contention has been once you're grounded, you stop taking this test. But, it appears the rules lawyers have won this round because of poor rules writing by GW. See above.

Considering it's "poorly written", 99% of gamers don't have a problem understanding it.

"If a flying monstrous creature that is swooping suffers one or more hits from a unit's Shooting attack, it must make a Grounded test immediately after that shooting attack has been resolved".
That's very clear, though I can see how you'd miss it if you were skimming.

Green is Best is actually agreeing with you. He's pointing out that if Grounding doesn't make a FMC stop Swooping, then continuing to shoot at a Grounded, but still Swooping, FMC would cause further Grounding tests. And that would be dumb as a bunch of guns will make a Swooping FMC crash itself to death repeatedly in the same turn.

That is the direct consequence of the argument: That that flying monstrous creature can crash if you keep shooting it with more units, even though it's been grounded.

I don't think you can prove this point. GW should have made things more clear on the restrictions of getting knocked out of the sky(grounded). Intill a 6th Ed BRB FAQ comes out I don't believe we will ever figure this one out. Because without an AQ both parties are Right and wrong.

Play it way #1 FMC gets grounded by a hit. He takes a str9 hit and can be assaulted as normal. And he still benefits from snap fire because of he's falling through the sky intill the assault phase. The FMC gets grounded again, take an additional str 9 hit. So on and so forth.

Play it way #2 FMC gets grounded by a hit. He takes a str 9 hit
and can be assaulted. Snap fire rule no longer applies because the monster has hit the ground and is now stationary. But the FMC will not take any additional FREE str 9 hits.


Personally I would push to play way #1 due to I spam skyfire so I want my free str 9 hits on that bad ass flying at me. Lol

Concurring with Masos on this one.

But his number 1 isn't part of the rule. It doesn't say he falls until the assault phase. It says he crashes to the ground and takes a Str 9 hit. This is not done after all shooting is done. It's done at the time of the failed grounding role.

So you have a T7 FMC and with this RAW....

Six squads of Str 3 flashlights can make a FMC take a possible six Str 9 saves from weapons that can't hurt it.

That sounds right.

RAW, yes.

I can fluff justify it by the repeated hits knocking the FMC even more off balance with each hit, hence taking repeat Str9 hits.

You guys are all fighting each other, but you should really join arms against GW for not wording it well enough to make all of you happy. I wish we could apply common sense here, but I guess it's too late for that. I think we can all agree, NOT RAI or RAW, if something was shot out of the air, and it hit the ground and took damage, it probably would not instantaneously be back in the air. Again, common sense here, not RAI or RAW. Of course rules lawyers will argue in favor of RAW, ignoring common sense, people without models that have this ability will rail for RAI, and the intelligent people will just ask TO's ahead of tournaments and sit down with their gaming group and make a group decision before the mess even starts. But please, continue your hate war. It's almost amusing to those of us with big tubs of popcorn in front of us. You also learn a lot about people from topics such as this one, and I'm just gonna say I lost respect for some people...

Grey Templar wrote:Thats what my thinking is.

Now, I originally thought they meant the FMC is no longer swooping. But then I thought of that exact situation.

They specifically singled out Assaulting and the Jink save. Not anything else associated with being a FMC in Swoop mode.


Not even GW is dumb enough to mess this up. They could have just said "The FMC no longer counts as Swooping when it is Grounded although it may swoop again next turn"

That would have done what is currently be arguing as RAI.

But they were very specific about what Grounding does. Hence my position.

The whole "GW went out of their way to write it as X" argument is counter RAW.

Grey Templar wrote:RAW, yes.

No. The Monsterous Creature takes a grounded check if it gets hit by a ranged weapon. It takes ONE check whenever a unit successfully hits it. Hence the use of the word "a". If they had wanted it to take a grounded check for each shot, they would have put "takes a grounded test for each hit". But they didn't. They said "If it gets shot at, after resolving wounds, it takes *A* grounded test". It's pretty unambiguous.

The FMC rules are not poorly written at all, this is just a case of WAAC players trying to exploit a loophole that isn't there.
You don't need to specifiy that a FMC is no longer Swooping if it has been grounded for the same reason you do not need to specify that if a unit is dead it can no longer shoot/assault/run. One state replaces the other.

Where in the rulebook does it say when the FMC is no longer grounded? If grounded was not an exclusive state, it never ends. So Grounded Swooping Flying Monstrous Creaturess (seriously?) can be assaulted for the rest of the game and immediately loses its jink when they dives? Seeing as GW "clearly went out of their way not to say" grounding ends when the model moves normally (what is normally?) this must be the case?

Anyone following the rule to act in the spirit of the game should be able to tell that Grounded is a third state for Flying Monstrous Creatures. "Becomes" indicates a change of state from one state to another. If you become rich you are no longer poor. If you become fat you are no longer thin. If you become WAAC you are no longer fun to play against. If you become Grounded you are no longer Swooping.

Eldarguy88 wrote:Where in the rulebook does it say when the FMC is no longer grounded? If grounded was not an exclusive state, it never ends. So Grounded Swooping Flying Monstrous Creaturess (seriously?) can be assaulted for the rest of the game and immediately loses its jink when they dives? Seeing as GW "clearly went out of their way not to say" grounding ends when the model moves normally (what is normally?) this must be the case?

You are free to interprit the rules as you wish. If you wish to take that interpretation, that is fine.
You have no evidence to support it, however.