Switch Theme:

Vanguard veteran loadout ideas  [RSS] Share on facebook Share on Twitter Submit to Reddit
»
Author Message
Advert


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.




Made in de
Nihilistic Necron Lord






Germany

Common sense would say you re-roll before modifiers. But GW says you dont. Common sense would say a knight should easily be able to step over an armorium container, without losing movement, but thats not true, because GW rules say so. Common sense would say a plasma gun isnt more likely to explode at night. But GW says it does. Common sense would say a flying model can move directly (diagonal) from the ground floor to the first or second floor of a ruin, but you have to add vertical plus horizontal distance, because GW rules say so. Common sense would say a vehicle cant shoot when only a tiny piece of its hull has line of sight to enemy units, but GW says the vehicle can shoot. Common sense would say you cant wound enemy models out of range, and out of sight, but you can, because GW says so. Common sense would say a tank commander doesnt explode further when he has a certain warlord trait, but GW says he does. Common sense would say a unit of infantry cant make a tank immobile by surrounding it, but GW says they can. Common sense would say a tank can still shoot when there are enemy models nearby. But GW says the tank cant fire when enemy models are within 1". Common sense would say you can shoot that character right in front of you, but GW says you cant, because there is another enemy model closer, hiding in a piece of terrain, not visible to your unit.

Long story short, GW rules have very little in common with common sense.
   
Made in us
Longtime Dakkanaut




 p5freak wrote:
Common sense would say you re-roll before modifiers. But GW says you dont. Common sense would say a knight should easily be able to step over an armorium container, without losing movement, but thats not true, because GW rules say so. Common sense would say a plasma gun isnt more likely to explode at night. But GW says it does. Common sense would say a flying model can move directly (diagonal) from the ground floor to the first or second floor of a ruin, but you have to add vertical plus horizontal distance, because GW rules say so. Common sense would say a vehicle cant shoot when only a tiny piece of its hull has line of sight to enemy units, but GW says the vehicle can shoot. Common sense would say you cant wound enemy models out of range, and out of sight, but you can, because GW says so. Common sense would say a tank commander doesnt explode further when he has a certain warlord trait, but GW says he does. Common sense would say a unit of infantry cant make a tank immobile by surrounding it, but GW says they can. Common sense would say a tank can still shoot when there are enemy models nearby. But GW says the tank cant fire when enemy models are within 1". Common sense would say you can shoot that character right in front of you, but GW says you cant, because there is another enemy model closer, hiding in a piece of terrain, not visible to your unit.

Long story short, GW rules have very little in common with common sense.


And in each of those cases the rules are very very explicit. There is no ambiguity. Also they are often a result of the same neck beards cheese that people are trying to pull here because gw thinks it’s gamers are nicer people then they really are.

Right here, right now, the rules are not explicit. They are quite ambiguous. And so The proper way to interpret things is following occam’s razor.
   
 
Forum Index » 40K General Discussion
Go to: