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.

Point 1:
Once again, I think you're forgetting that according to RAW the trukk itself apparently is not moving, but is being moved.
I'm not making that up, the rule states "Move the trukk", not anything indicating that the immobilised trukk is moving by itself.
I've been over this a few times so I'm inclined to agree with dajobe. We're at an impass.

Point 2:
I've tried to make my points clear on what I think of this, but you're telling me I'm wrong by calling in obscure examples.

The truth is, there is always an exception or two to every rule and I'm not denying that.
Yes, there is going to be 1 or 2 general vs specific rules the other way around.
It does you no good to wave that exception in someones face, because it is still an exception.
The other truth is that the Codices are full of specifics, so as a relative comparison, you are wrong.

Point 3:
This game is supposed to be fun and cinematic. I'm with cgmckenzie there. That is how the group I play in plays.
We would rather have fun, some laughs and any disagreements can be sorted by some common sense and reasonable thinking. You can doggedly hold onto certain rules as much as you like, but in the real world, real people dont like playing with people who have that attitude to games. It's not cheating, its just no fun. Sure, the flexible attitude might not work on a forum whereby the rules are the rules, but I'm agreeing to disagree here.

It's still just a game.

Take care people, I'm off home to paint my trukk.

It's likely the "does not move" arguement. But I'm going to play it as "does move" in the unlikely event my immobilized truck gets hit and kareens. And I'll argue that while there's not any rule supporting it, it's pretty Orky. Most people I play with will go with that, because it's an unlikely situation and they're pretty laid back guys so they'll agree with me. We like to have fun.

But anyways, if you're playing with Nos, no the truck would move 0". As written.

Good point Plonka, i play to have fun, when me and my brother are argueing about a cover save because its debatable whether half the unit is in cover or whatever the issue is, i just say F*** it, how about i get a 5+ rather than a 4? We could get out a protractor, measure the angle, mark on the table where everyone is, and go through a lenghty technical process...so all of you who are saying "cant move" get out your metaphorical protractors and go have a blast

nosferatu1001 wrote:Yet it does not specifically override the BRB rules on mvoing off the board - so it doesnt

There are no rules in the BRB for moving off the board
And the BRB FAQ states that models may not move of the table on their own.

Q: Can models move off the table? (p11)
A: Not unless a rule or the mission being played clearly
specify that they can.

Ramshackle is not the model moving on its own thus it could go off the table, but moving off the table was explicitly handled in the ork FAQ.

Q. If a Trukk suffers a ‘Kareen!’ result, what
happens if the random movement forces it into
friendly models or off the table?
A. The vehicle stops as soon as it comes into
contact with friendly models or the table’s edge.

It doesnt specifically override the rules on moving when you are immobilised, so it doesnt override them

The trukk cannot move because it has no SPECIFIC permission to do so. An explicit permission would be "...possible, even if the trukk is immobilised"

It does not need to, because the trukk is not moving by itself. Immobilized only prevents models from moving on their own.
"It may not move for the rest of the game."(BRB pg.61)
The trukk may not move, but the trukk may be moved.

The "as far as possible" entirely puts the nail through any argument as well. Is it possible to move when immobilised? No? Then you HAVE moved as far as possible.

As "as far as possible" obviously applies to the limits given in the rule and added by the FAQ.

jidmah's post just made me change camps. I do not see any hole in his arguments and reasoning. I'll have to reluctantly agree with him.

Jidmah wrote: There are no rules in the BRB for moving off the board

BRB page 95, "If any of the models in a deep striking unit cannot be deployed because they would land off the table..."
There's one.

Jidmah wrote:It does not need to, because the trukk is not moving by itself. Immobilized only prevents models from moving on their own.
"It may not move for the rest of the game."(BRB pg.61)
The trukk may not move, but the trukk may be moved.

Technically speaking, the trukk (nor any other vehicle for that matter) never moves, it is moved by the player.

Using your logic, I may freely move any of my immobilized vehicles because the vehicle isn't moving, it is being moved. By me.

Jidmah wrote:As "as far as possible" obviously applies to the limits given in the rule and added by the FAQ.

And just ignores the "Immobilized" rule?
So then who decides which rules are ignored and which are applied.

Suppose you have a stunned looted wagon.
The looted wagon rule says at the start of the ork movement phase you roll a die and if a '1' is rolled the wagon moves forward as far as possible.
Since it is a tank, it can move 12".
So does "Don't Press Dat" let the looted wagon move 12" forward even if stunned (or immobilized)?

POint 1 - no, Im not ignoring it. I've covered and refuted that misleading argument.
The trukk is still moving, and is not BEING moved by another effect like tank shock.

Point 2: No, "specific beats general" is always right. And WBB versus Sweeping Advance is *not* obscure. You do realise that "codex trumps rulebook" leads to you always getting an armour save, even against power weapons, as your codex states you do?

So, stick with the actual rules basis for the game: the more specific rule WHEREEVER it is located beats the more general rule WHEREVER located. Easy. No exc eptions ever needed as well.

Jidmah - the BRB never gives you permission to move off the board, therefore you cannot. It has rules by omission - an inherent lack of permission to do something prevents you from doing it.

No, as far as possible does not mean that the examples given are meant to be exhaustive. The FAQ shows this by acting as a reminder that, no, you still follow the movement rules.

The Trukk follows *all* normal restrictions on movement. Every. Last. One. To suddenly claim it ignores such a basic rule as "you cannot move" is asinine.

Time wizard, all models are moved.BY ME. we are saying the trukk was moved somehow by another model's actions, instead of moving by its own actions. As much as i'd like to have the actual combat played out like a movie with explosions and real physics...guess what?Can't.

nosferatu1001 wrote:POint 1 - no, Im not ignoring it. I've covered and refuted that misleading argument.
The trukk is still moving, and is not BEING moved by another effect like tank shock.

Point 2: No, "specific beats general" is always right. And WBB versus Sweeping Advance is *not* obscure. You do realise that "codex trumps rulebook" leads to you always getting an armour save, even against power weapons, as your codex states you do?

So, stick with the actual rules basis for the game: the more specific rule WHEREEVER it is located beats the more general rule WHEREVER located. Easy. No exc eptions ever needed as well.

Jidmah - the BRB never gives you permission to move off the board, therefore you cannot. It has rules by omission - an inherent lack of permission to do something prevents you from doing it.

No, as far as possible does not mean that the examples given are meant to be exhaustive. The FAQ shows this by acting as a reminder that, no, you still follow the movement rules.

The Trukk follows *all* normal restrictions on movement. Every. Last. One. To suddenly claim it ignores such a basic rule as "you cannot move" is asinine.

And i would argue that the ramshakle rule is more specific then immobilized therefore overrides it.

It's worth noting that you don't exactly electively move models in the enemies turn unless they've done something that causes your model or a unit to move IE fall back and so on, this isn't elective, the ramshackle table is telling you to do so. This is like arguing that a lifta droppa wouldn't move an immobilized vehicle because its immobile. It's also worth pointing out that a trukk that simply didn't move in its movement phase can still end up to 3D6 inches away if that result comes up on the ramshackle table, momentum has never been a pre-requisite for this to occur.

It's not like immobile ever meant much to an army that can take grot riggers for 5pts. In any case, the assumption is being made that immobile vehicles just ignore certain results of the ramshackle table and that's simply not supported by the rules.

My point from the start. It tells you to Move but now how it was moved. This can be done by Many different ways. The rule states things go out of control. So there is a reason why it moves but you can use your head to think of better ways.

The lash of submision can move units that would otherwise be unable to move, i.e gone to ground.

So there is precidence for moving unmovable models.

Besides its a non-voluntary forced move as a result of a damage table result.

Your not even in the movement phase so realy you could argue you should always move it 0" as your only alowed to move in the movment phase any way, right?

Or running in the shooting/assaulting in the assault phase. But enemy shooting/assault phase, normal movement would be 0". Good point.

-cgmckenzie

Solourus - erm, no. Lash cannot move units that have gtg - see the FAQ.

youbedead - how are you arguing that? Given that the Ramshackle rule applies to all trukks, not just trukks that are immobilised, in order to be more specific it would have to SPECIFY (gee, whod have thought a more specific rule may specify what it is overruling....) that it worked against immobilised results.

And it doesnt. So it doesnt.

Really that simple.

Ramshackle is more specific than immobilized.

Immobilized applies to all vehicles, ramshackle applies only to a specific vehicle, trukks.

-cgmckenzie

Sigh.

What is more specific? Ramshackle on any trukk, or Ramshackle on an already immobilised trukk

The latter is the more specific situation

It MUST specify that it works against immobilised, otherwise it does not.

I say again: Ramshackle follows ALL normal movement rules, all of them - yet you are trying to claim, with no rules argument against the two rules proving you wrong (as far as possible, move) for doing so.

A FAQ reminding you that you cannot move off the table unless told you can does not mean this is an explicit restriction, and you get to ignore anything not explicitly listed as a restriction. That is "it doesnt say I cant", and is a crap rules argument.

nosferatu1001 wrote:Sigh.

What is more specific? Ramshackle on any trukk, or Ramshackle on an already immobilised trukk

The latter is the more specific situation

It MUST specify that it works against immobilised, otherwise it does not.

I say again: Ramshackle follows ALL normal movement rules, all of them - yet you are trying to claim, with no rules argument against the two rules proving you wrong (as far as possible, move) for doing so.

A FAQ reminding you that you cannot move off the table unless told you can does not mean this is an explicit restriction, and you get to ignore anything not explicitly listed as a restriction. That is "it doesnt say I cant", and is a crap rules argument.

Under that reasoning, doesnt the trukk move because of the specific 'ramshackle' rule specifying to "move the trukk" overrides the general 'immobilised' rule?
Once again, this is because there is an order to "Move the trukk x", not "the trukk moves x". This order is to the player, not to the model.

Unless I've missed something, I have seen no credible reason against this reasonable statement so far...

time wizard wrote:

Jidmah wrote: There are no rules in the BRB for moving off the board

BRB page 95, "If any of the models in a deep striking unit cannot be deployed because they would land off the table..."
There's one.

Fine, you win the nitpicking war

Technically speaking, the trukk (nor any other vehicle for that matter) never moves, it is moved by the player.

This would be an incorrect assumption - no rule ever states that you may shoot the enemy models, but always refers to the model(s) shooting. So, in context, models are able to act.
And yeah, I checked any codex and rule I got my hands on for this, because I wanted a RAW for shooting my enemy models with rubber bands
Sadly no such rule was ever written. I wonder if GW thought of this.

Using your logic, I may freely move any of my immobilized vehicles because the vehicle isn't moving, it is being moved. By me.

You don't have permission to move models unless told to do so. Permissive ruleset.

Jidmah wrote:As "as far as possible" obviously applies to the limits given in the rule and added by the FAQ.

And just ignores the "Immobilized" rule?
So then who decides which rules are ignored and which are applied.

The rules do. Skimmers ignore intervening terrain, feel no pain ignores wounds, moral checks ignore casualties caused in close combat.
Or maybe a more fitting example: Infantry ignores the vehicle damage chart.

Suppose you have a stunned looted wagon.
The looted wagon rule says at the start of the ork movement phase you roll a die and if a '1' is rolled the wagon moves forward as far as possible.
Since it is a tank, it can move 12".
So does "Don't Press Dat" let the looted wagon move 12" forward even if stunned (or immobilized)?

"Don't Press Dat" is worded so that the looted wagon is told to take action, as opposed to telling the player what to do. So no problem here, as "the looted wagon may not move" trumps "the looted wagon must move". If anything, it indicates that my interpretation is right.

nosferatu1001 wrote:Sigh.

What is more specific? Ramshackle on any trukk, or Ramshackle on an already immobilised trukk

Ramshackle on an already immobilized trukk is not a rule. Immobilized is - thus neither is clearly more specific.

The latter is the more specific situation

It MUST specify that it works against immobilised, otherwise it does not.

It does not have to specify to work against a rule that does not apply.

I say again: Ramshackle follows ALL normal movement rules, all of them - yet you are trying to claim, with no rules argument against the two rules proving you wrong (as far as possible, move) for doing so.

I did provide a rules argument, you are just choosing to ignore it. All movement rules and restrictions, save for the summary at the beginning of the chapter, talk about units taking actions to move. Ramshackle does not ask an action of the trukk, but rather of a player, as opposed to "Don't press dat!". The wording is even consistent across forced moves caused by special rules(for example, Magna Grapple).

A FAQ reminding you that you cannot move off the table unless told you can does not mean this is an explicit restriction, and you get to ignore anything not explicitly listed as a restriction. That is "it doesnt say I cant", and is a crap rules argument.

Those rules never apply, as all of them restrict actions taken by models, not by players. You also stated you proved the argument "Trukk moves != Trukk is moved" as false, but I can't see where.

Jidmah - yet you have not proven that the rule does not apply.

The rule requires the trukk to move 3D6". The trukk is not "is moved" by an external event.

The more specific situation is an immobilised trukk with Kareen!. Thats how specific vs general works.

nosferatu1001 wrote:The rule requires the trukk to move 3D6". The trukk is not "is moved" by an external event.

The more specific situation is an immobilised trukk with Kareen!. Thats how specific vs general works.

Which was also my point about looted wagons and Don't Press Dat. Similar to Kareen.

Don't Press Dat says you must roll a dice, ir it's a '1' you must move forward as far as possible.

And if immobilized the farthest it can move, as nosferatu repeats, is 0".

Immobilized means the vehicle can't move for the rest of the game. Can't even pivot.
It is just that simple.

nosferatu1001 wrote:Jidmah - yet you have not proven that the rule does not apply.

The rule requires the trukk to move 3D6". The trukk is not "is moved" by an external event.

The more specific situation is an immobilised trukk with Kareen!. Thats how specific vs general works.

It says move the truck. It does not say the trukk is making a move action or the trukk makes a normal move action.

Time wizard, you obviously have been missing the point for the last 4 pages, when something becomes immobilized, its not like it suddenly has 5000 foot pylons that dig into the ground and is magnetically attached to whatever terrain happens to be below it...its like the engine got shot up or wheels shot off...guess what, still has a gas tank that can explode and push it somewhere even if stationairy, rockets can still randomly land nearby and throw the vehicle somewhere!

dajobe wrote:Time wizard, you obviously have been missing the point for the last 4 pages, when something becomes immobilized, its not like it suddenly has 5000 foot pylons that dig into the ground and is magnetically attached to whatever terrain happens to be below it...its like the engine got shot up or wheels shot off...guess what, still has a gas tank that can explode and push it somewhere even if stationairy, rockets can still randomly land nearby and throw the vehicle somewhere!

Missing the point? I think not.
Kareem says the trukk moves 3D6". Not that the gas tank blows up and it is propelled 3D6", not that a rocket hit nearby and rolled it 3D6", it says it moves 3D6".
And vehicles that are immobilized may not move for the rest of the game.
Guess what, it got its wheels blown off, or the tranny blew up, or it threw a track, or its gas tank got punctured. So what? It doesn't matter, it can't move.
And that has been the point for the last 4 pages.

im done with this thread, i guess were all just gonna have to agree to disagree

+1

I've seen threads on this forum spanning 14 pages where opposing opinions got locked in a repetitive loop.
The longer this goes on, the harder it is for someone who wants an answer, because they will need to read through all this.

I propose that both sides have made their point and leave it to whoever reads this to decide on their own terms.

dajobe wrote:im done with this thread, i guess were all just gonna have to agree to disagree

Fair enough - I agree that there are 2 proven rules (moves, as far as possible) and no rules argument against them.

Your "side" keeps returning to fluff. Fluff, apart from one specified instance, has no place in rules.

nosferatu1001 wrote:

dajobe wrote:im done with this thread, i guess were all just gonna have to agree to disagree

Fair enough - I agree that there are 2 proven rules (moves, as far as possible) and no rules argument against them.

Your "side" keeps returning to fluff. Fluff, apart from one specified instance, has no place in rules.

You're at risk of sounding like a troll, dude.

Not a troll.

I've given reasoned, rules based arguments, based on the way the game is put together (specific beating general)

In return, even 4 pages in, peopole are still claiming a move isnt a move, and you get to ignore the normal rules for moving - despite the FAQ confirming that you dont actually do so.

I will let this die for me with this last post. Feel free to ignore it if you wish.

The rule says move it 3D6 inches. You will be moving at least 3" as far as possible is 3" or 18" unless you encounter a enemy unit or terrain. It doesn't get more specific than that. You roll 3 d6's and move it as far as the dice tell you to that is as far as possible unless your run into an enemy unit or terrain.

Ok I'm now done and agree with everyone to agree to disagree.

nosferatu1001 wrote:Not a troll.

I've given reasoned, rules based arguments, based on the way the game is put together (specific beating general)

In return, even 4 pages in, peopole are still claiming a move isnt a move, and you get to ignore the normal rules for moving - despite the FAQ confirming that you dont actually do so.

No one is denying your arguments, least of all me. We're just agreeing to disagree because the alternative appears to be to argue ad nauseam.

What you are doing is trying to provoke an emotional response by the classic "fine, but i'm still right" comment... which is trolling.

Let it be known, also, that I did not call you a troll but said you're at risk of sounding like one.