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.

 WrentheFaceless wrote:

 Nem wrote:

I think there is some ambiguity - at least in what the scope of that sentence means.


Khan hits on WS (BRB), Khan hits on 2+ (Codex) is a example of a rule in the rulebook and one printed in the codex conflicting

Page/para that states Kharn ever uses his WS in a melee attack. You're making this part up. He never uses WS for any melee attacks, per his rule "Always hits on a 2+"

This is a clear case of codex > rulebook, there's no 'ambiguity' about it

I was making the point that is a clear case of codex and rulebook, I didn't say Khan hits on his WS, just there are 2 rules about how someone hits, the ones in the BRB and the ones in Kharns rules, and then making the point invisibility VS Khan is not the same sort of conflict.

tldr: Wasn't disagreeing with that.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Tonberry7 wrote:

 Nem wrote:

AlexRae wrote:
"On rare occasions, a conflict will arise between a rule in this rulebook, and one printed in a codex. Where this occurs, the rule printed in the codex or Army List Entry always takes precedence. "

If this is word for word what the BRB says, then this is a non-issue. There is no ambiguity. The rule for Gorechild printed in the Codex takes precedence over the rule for Invisibility written in the BRB.

I think there is some ambiguity - at least in what the scope of that sentence means.

For Kharn vs Invisibility there is no ambiguity apart from that which you seem to be trying to manufacture. That quote from the BRB is probably one of the least ambiguous statements in there.

I'm not manufacturing anything, your quoting a rule, I'm saying that rule in that sentence the context of the 'conflict' matters. This idea of that sentence and its context has been around longer than me on these boards, and many are well versed in it. If you don't want to or feel like it should be read that way that's fine. I don't/can't use Invis and neither do I play against any of these things, so makes little difference to me either way. If you can't understand why someone would say RAW wise Invisibility as a restriction would take precedence after posting all that I have, then I can't help anymore.

 Nem wrote:

 Tonberry7 wrote:

 Nem wrote:

AlexRae wrote:
"On rare occasions, a conflict will arise between a rule in this rulebook, and one printed in a codex. Where this occurs, the rule printed in the codex or Army List Entry always takes precedence. "

If this is word for word what the BRB says, then this is a non-issue. There is no ambiguity. The rule for Gorechild printed in the Codex takes precedence over the rule for Invisibility written in the BRB.

I think there is some ambiguity - at least in what the scope of that sentence means.

For Kharn vs Invisibility there is no ambiguity apart from that which you seem to be trying to manufacture. That quote from the BRB is probably one of the least ambiguous statements in there.

I'm not manufacturing anything, your quoting a rule, I'm saying that rule in that sentence the context of the 'conflict' matters.

I really can't see how you come to that conclusion; the rule really doesn't leave any room for interpretation. It doesn't mention any distinction in the 'context of the conflict'.

 Nem wrote:
This idea of that sentence and its context has been around longer than me on these boards, and many are well versed in it. If you don't want to or feel like it should be read that way that's fine.

There's only one way it can be read unless you want to deliberately misinterpret it.

 Nem wrote:
I don't/can't use Invis and neither do I play against any of these things, so makes little difference to me either way. If you can't understand why someone would say RAW wise Invisibility as a restriction would take precedence after posting all that I have, then I can't help anymore.

No, I can't understand why RAW wise you would think Invisibility would take precedence over the rules for Gorechild because the rule explicitly tells us it's the other way around. But thanks for your help anyway.

Because Invisibility is not a "rule," the Codex taking precedence over the BRB doesn't come into account. That part in the BRB says that if a RULE from a Codex comes into conflict with a RULE from the BRB, the Codex wins, but like I said, Invis is not a "rule" - it is a power. Because of this, I believe the "restrictions overrule permissions" interpretation tool would mean that Kharn would have to roll a 6 to hit an Invisible unit in CC.

EDIT (clarity): Because Invis is not a rule, the Codex > BRB does not come into account, therefore the Restrictions > Permissions tool must.

Powers are rules...

So I will throw in my 2 cents, there is some very compelling statements saying that the codex does beat out the rule book which I agree with.

But at the end of the day, Kharn never misses... on a 1 he hits a friendly target. Now you might say, that is Kharn is alone, and he rolls a 1, that he misses.

I would say this is true, if you are some kind of scum that isn't attuned to the psychopathic tendencies of a Khorne killing machine. When Kharn rolls a 1 and doesn't actually hit one of his own units, he is actually hitting a ghost of one of his fallen brothers who over the thousands of years of combat he has endured has decided to reappear to taunt him in battle.

That being said, Kharn always hits on a 2+ because even if you are partially invisible, Kharn will still kill you.

 DeathReaper wrote:
Powers are rules...

I wouldn't classify powers as rules. They can sometimes CONFER rules, special or otherwise, but powers are abilities or a form of equipment (which itself HAS rules, but is not considered a rule, i.e. a Power Axe has rules, but the weapon is not itself a rule). A RULE would be something that allows a model to use psychic abilities. Maybe I'm out in the middle of nowhere on this, but that's how I've read it. I see psychic powers as a form of equipment for a unit that has the rule allowing it to use them.

Nobody I play uses Kharn, so ultimately this contention has no effect on me. And to be honest, from a lore-standpoint, I would say that Gorechild doesn't need to SEE its enemies to know that there is some fresh blood nearby waiting to be spilled.


EDIT: Link to explanation of how this stuff works... http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/30/520554.page#5505107

I'd agree that Kharn hits on a 2+ regardless. The codex did come out before 7th edition rules, so it does need an FAQ for clarification. Fluff-wise, you could argue both ways...

Kharn wildly attacks out and hits invisible unit because it can't escape, or kharn blindly lashes towards an invisible unit, hits it a couple times, but also hits a couple of his guys.

Just what your gaming group or FLGS is okay with will have to work until an FAQ.

this is an easy one,


BRB says kharn hits on a 6


codex says kharn hits on a 2+ (and hits on a 1, but the wrong side)


codex > BRB.

end of story, clear cut too...

 Ninjakk wrote:
I wouldn't classify powers as rules. They can sometimes CONFER rules, special or otherwise, but powers are abilities or a form of equipment (which itself HAS rules, but is not considered a rule, i.e. a Power Axe has rules, but the weapon is not itself a rule).

IMO: exactly. And invisibility confers rules to its target ( rules such as: unit can only be fired upon by snapshots, can only be hit in melee on 6...), just like Power Axe confers set of rules (melee attack str modification, melee attack AP modification etc.).

I don't think that this line of thinking somehow conflict with the post you've provided link to btw.

 Ninjakk wrote:

 DeathReaper wrote:
Powers are rules...

I wouldn't classify powers as rules. They can sometimes CONFER rules, special or otherwise, but powers are abilities or a form of equipment (which itself HAS rules, but is not considered a rule, i.e. a Power Axe has rules, but the weapon is not itself a rule). A RULE would be something that allows a model to use psychic abilities. Maybe I'm out in the middle of nowhere on this, but that's how I've read it. I see psychic powers as a form of equipment for a unit that has the rule allowing it to use them.

Casting the power puts rules into effect. Thus powers contain rules.

 Barrogh wrote:

I don't think that this line of thinking somehow conflict with the post you've provided link to btw.

The link that I provided says that regardless of BRB, Codex, advanced, or basic rules, restrictions always trump permissions.

I think you all are misapplying codex>BRB here. I have never seen anything that says "all codex rules negate all brb powers."

 troa wrote:
I think you all are misapplying codex>BRB here. I have never seen anything that says "all codex rules negate all brb powers."

Look at this part of the BRB then.

"On rare occasions, a conflict will arise between a rule in this rulebook, and one printed in a codex. Where this occurs, the rule printed in the codex or Army List Entry always takes precedence." (General Principles chapter, Basic Versus Advanced section, 3rd graph, 4th sentence).

Just feel the need to point out this line:
The Rules contains a comprehensive set of rules allowing you to recreate the vicious conflicts of the 41st Millennium on the tabletop

It is sad when I have to quote the introduction to the book itself to show that something found within The Rules is a Rule. However, this is easily done as the introduction informs us there are three core sections to the book as a whole, a gallery of pictures designed for just pure marketing, a fluff section explaining the lore and a section literally named The Rules that explains how to play the game itself. Within The Rules is another introduction page informing us of the individual sub-sections that this part of the book is broken down into, including such things as Core Rules, Unit Types and anything found in the Appendix. Given that the book informs us that the Appendix belongs to the section known as The Rules, and this section of the book contains the Rules to play the game itself I only have a single questions to ask:

Please explain to me how something which informs us how to go about playing the game, and found in a section devoted to the Rules for the game, is not itself a Rule?

JinxDragon wrote:
Please explain to me how something which informs us how to go about playing the game, and found in a section devoted to the Rules for the game, is not itself a Rule?

That's a semi circular definition - if it tells us (specifically) how to play the game (use six sided dice, etc) then it is a rule. But not everything in there is a rule - take Vortex's fluff "The psyker rends the material realm asunder,". That's not a rule, it doesn't tell us how to play the game. It's fluff.

A "Power Axe" is not a rule. It is a weapon, which modifies 2 basic rules - +1 to the Strength of an attack (NOT the S characteristic btw), and makes it AP2 and applies the Unwieldy rule.

Similarly, Invisibility is not a rule, it is a power, which modifies basic rules (what you need to roll to hit and what you can deliberately target with some weapons.

Goreblood/child(?), Kharn's weapon applies an advanced rule: "always hits on a 2+". In terms of precedence, that is a weapon specific, model specific, codex specific advanced rule, which trumps anything not similarly specific "Smashface's Shield of Eff-Hew: Smashface can never be hit except on a 6", at which point a timing conflict arises and GW's cop out of "player whose turn it is decides" would come into play. Since no such thing exists...

Kharne always hits on a 2+.
Always.

In order for any game to work, ever, restrictions (in all cases) must overrule permissions. If a permission is allowed to overrule a restriction, where there is a conflict, then the entire game's ruleset comes unraveled.


EDIT: More advanced, more specific permissions can overrule lesser restrictions. Sorry I overlooked that...

 Ninjakk wrote:
In order for any game to work, ever, restrictions (in all cases) must overrule permissions. If a permission is allowed to overrule a restriction, where there is a conflict, then the entire game's ruleset comes unraveled.

Well then, bad news:

Models in the Way
A model cannot move within 1" of an enemy model unless they are charging into close combat in the Assault phase, and can never move or pivot (see below) through another model (friend or foe) at any time. To move past, they must go around.

No more flyers, FMC, jump/jet troops or skimmers. You must go around, not over, if you subscribe to that view.

Some people have funny ideas of what makes up a 'Rule' then, because I would consider the title or classification to be part of the Rule itself. However, given that Game Workshop already has some real stupid ideas when it comes to how a Rulebook should be formatted, I shouldn't really be surprised that arguments over what a Rule consists of occurs. Should someone want to make such an argument, that the Title given to a Rule or any classification is not part of the Rule in question, then this is the perfect system in which to do so. It is the internet, I am sure someone has that opinion out there, so we might see such an argument and I am curious to see where it's logical conclusion might take us.

Hell, to show how complicated the matter is:
Game Workshop has considered "Fluff" to be part of the Rules in the past!

The most obvious example is a piece of 6th Edition Gray Knight equipment containing a Rule related to enemy 'Plasma Weapons' within a certain range. Someone asked the Authors which weapons are effected by this piece of war-gear and that question made it into the official Frequently Asked Questions that sites like this one treat as 'Written Rules.' The reply back was that every piece of war-gear, from Pulse Rifles right through to Eldar Missile systems, which contained the word Plasma somewhere in the description, or Fluff as we know it, then it is subject to the war-gear in question. So while in 99.9% of cases the Fluff does nothing, there have been situations where Fluff could impact the outcome of a Game and those situations... Game Workshop clearly considers the fluff to be a 'Written Rule.'

So if we had instructions telling us how to Sunder the Realm, that piece of Fluff you quoted would require us to Sunder the Realm.
it is simply because we lack instructions telling us how to go about doing so that we are not required to actually do so.

Codex > Rulebook. This is the law of the jungle. And jetstar eldar really dont need ANOTHER crutch in a super specific situation given their status as top dog already. Boo hoo.

Besides, Kharn is the galaxy's most flying rodent gak cray cray killing machine, and I'm pretty sure he swings with his eyes closed anyway.

I think if you take out the antagonizers, the consensus might be hits on a two. Kharne dont give two rats butts about invisible targets

RAWRAIrobblerobble wrote:


No more flyers, FMC, jump/jet troops or skimmers. You must go around, not over, if you subscribe to that view.

Sorry, let me clarify. A basic restriction trumps a basic permission. An advanced permission trumps a basic restriction. An advanced restriction trumps advanced and basic permissions. An advanced, more specific permission trumps lesser restrictions, and finally an advanced, more specific restriction trumps all.

The codex > BRB chant applies to general cases because normally the rules in the codex will be more advanced and specific than those in the BRB. This situation is not such a case. As both Kharn's rule and Invisibility are equal to each other in advanced status AND in specificity, the restriction takes precedence.

codex> rulebook

psychic powers are not in the core rules, but they are not special rules or advanced rules, they exist in the appendix of the rulebook. Whatever that may mean.

regardless generally models need to roll a 6 to hit invisible models, kharn specifically is called out through gorechild as needing only 2's to hit.

at best if there wasn't the case for codex versus rulebook, and general versus specific then it would come down to whos turn it is deciding when to apply set things so the chaos player could apply the need 6s to hit, then need 2+ to hit.

the section on basic versus advanced rules has a good example. It goes on to state if there is a conflict between a rule in this rulebook (ie the brb) and a codex, the codex rule wins.

On rare occasions, a conflict will arise between a rule in this rulebook, and one printed in a codex. Where this occurs, the rule printed in the codex or Army List Entry always takes precedence.

- above quoted from BRB under basic versus advanced rules

So kharn wins, with 2+ to hit.

I haven't seen Kharn on a table in a long time though so not sure how much of a threat this is to invis units

regarding psychic powers, I am pretty sure they are part of the rules. Otherwise they would just be fluff and have no actual effect in the game. As generation of psychic powers happens under the core rules, despite that the psychic powers themselves are listed in the appendix it is probably more fair to say they are core rules, than to say they are special or advanced rules. Also it is called out at the end of the core rules that the core rules includes "obliterating your victims with mystical psychic powers." so most likely, core rules.

Lungpickle wrote:
I think if you take out the antagonizers, the consensus might be hits on a two. Kharne dont give two rats butts about invisible targets

Of course there would be a consensus if you take out one side of of a two-sided argument...


Automatically Appended Next Post:

blaktoof wrote:
codex> rulebook

psychic powers are not in the core rules, but they are not special rules or advanced rules, they exist in the appendix of the rulebook. Whatever that may mean.

regardless generally models need to roll a 6 to hit invisible models, kharn specifically is called out through gorechild as needing only 2's to hit.

at best if there wasn't the cae fo codex versus rulebook, and general versus specific then it would come down to whos turn it is deciding when to apply set things so the chaos player could apply the need 6s to hit, then need 2+ to hit.

Things that change the way the basic rules apply are considered advanced. Those that do it in specific ways are both specific AND advanced. Both Kharn's rule and Invis are advanced and equal in specificity. Codex > BRB only comes into effect when, say, both rules in question are permissions or both are restrictions. When one is a restriction and the other a permission, the restriction takes precedence.

Things that change the way the basic rules apply are considered advanced. Those that do it in specific ways are both specific AND advanced. Both Kharn's rule and Invis are advanced and equal in specificity. Codex > BRB only comes into effect when, say, both rules in question are permissions or both are restrictions. When one is a restriction and the other a permission, the restriction takes precedence.

From what I can tell restrictions take precedence over general permissions.

specific permissions take precedence over general restrictions.

for example.

If a model had a special rule that caused all models to automatically fallback from it.

If a fearless model which had a special permission that it never fellback encountered it, it would not fall back.

Generally a model compares WS to determine to hit rolls

Specifically a core rule states that invisible models can only be hit on a 6.

Specifically an advanced rule states that a specific model, with a specific items always hits on a 2+ even if it would normally be something that they would automatically hit.

The advanced rules that apply to a unit are indicated in its Army List Entry. Army List Entries can be found in a number of Games Workshop publications, such as a Warhammer 40,000 codex.

- above quote from basic versus advanced rules.

Gorechild appears in Kharns army list entry, so it is indeed an advanced rule.

I do not believe psychic powers appear in an army list entry, other than the ability to generate psychic powers which is a special rule which is advanced. However the powers themselves are not special rules (although some grant special rules) and do not seem to have any rules calling them out as advanced rules.


edit-

on further reading it seems

basic rules are rules that apply to every model.

However at the same time the authors took the time to state that advanced rules are rules that are indicated in their army list entries.

so there is the possible conundrum that psychic powers themselves are neither advanced nor basic rules, as they do not appear in the army list entry(which is needed to be an advanced rule) but at the same time do not apply to all models (which is a basic rule).

However as gorechilds rule are advanced rules they probably override psychic powers.

blaktoof wrote:
Specifically a core rule states that invisible models can only be hit on a 6.

Powers are not core rules, as they do not apply to all models in the game.


The entry that says that "advanced rules that apply to a unit are indicated in its Army List Entry" is referencing any special or unique rules that that unit possesses. That entry does not mean that ONLY those rules found in Army List Entries are advanced. A rule does not have to be listed in an army list to be advanced.

I believe that my previous statement stands- since both Kharn's rule and Invisibility are in the realm of advanced, and they are both equal in specificity, then the restriction overrules the permission.

 Ninjakk wrote:

blaktoof wrote:
Specifically a core rule states that invisible models can only be hit on a 6.

Powers are not core rules, as they do not apply to all models in the game.


The entry that says that "advanced rules that apply to a unit are indicated in its Army List Entry" is referencing any special or unique rules that that unit possesses. That entry does not mean that ONLY those rules found in Army List Entries are advanced. A rule does not have to be listed in an army list to be advanced.

I believe that my previous statement stands- since both Kharn's rule and Invisibility are in the realm of advanced, and they are both equal in specificity, then the restriction overrules the permission.

They aren't equal in specificity.

How many models in the game have access to Invisibility?

How many models in the game have access to Gorechild?

They aren't equal in specificity. 

How many models in the game have access to Invisibility? 

How many models in the game have access to Gorechild?

That's not how specific vs general works. Specific vs general is about which rule specifically mentions the situation. For instance sweeping advance clearly states no rule can save you therefore Yarrick's iron will rule doesn't save him after being swept even though it applies to far less models, a rule would would have to specifically mention sweeping advance to be more specific than it. However if someone had a rule that saved them no matter how they were removed from play rule would be equally as specific as sweeping advance (and thus rulebook vs codex would come into play).

What we have here is "can only be hit on 6" vs "always hits on 2+". So they are indeed equally specific as both claim to always work when called upon. Neither specifically mentions interactions with other rules so neither is more specific that way and neither mentions the others rule so neither is more specific that way. Thus we have a conflict between 2 equally specific rules meaning we have to use Rulebook vs Codex to resolve it.

I love the shear amount of hate against Kharn here, you all must be so upset that Chaos actually has a tool that can counter invisibility in h2h.

That being said, if you rely on the one power to grant you victory, play a different build, you are clearly trying to break the game for competitive play.

Codex > Rule book

Same argument in the rule book that "Snap shots may never exceed ballistic skill 1" and "marker lights can specifically used in overwatch and to modify snapshots above ballistic skill 1" in the Tau Codex.

Pick one because you can't both be right...

It is so easy to resolve...

Is Invisibility in the BRB? Yes

Is Gorechild in a codex? Yes

Is there an instance where you have a rules conflict between two rules, one from the BRB and one from a codex? Yes

Codex takes precedent over BRB.

 Konrax wrote:
I love the shear amount of hate against Kharn here, you all must be so upset that Chaos actually has a tool that can counter invisibility in h2h.

Do not assign bias when there is none. it is not a good way to discuss rules.

No one has said they hate Kharn.