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.

Instead of using another ranged weapon - so you cant shoot. Thie "another" simply implies it is a ranged weapon - but there are no rules for it, so it isnt.

This is pretty funny to me, because lash clearly is and should be treated as a psa (as should anything that targets an enemy unit), but has just never been FAQed, so we get into this mess.

Actually its been FAQ'd the other way - it isnt a PSA because GW have said it isnt.

What about powers that target enemy units but are not cast during the shooting phase like Doom? Does that model still get to shoot during the shooting phase?

Doom should have been erratad with the new edition.

Nos: you're giving the games designers waaaaay too much credit.

My point is that it was never stated to be a psa, so we should play it as such. I just happen to think it's an omission due to neglect.

There's a FAQ answer that is right on point regarding what is and what is not a PSA. There is no neglect. Lash is not a PSA.

Avatar 720 wrote:One part ("...instead of using another ranged weapon.") is, the other part (your interpretation of its meaning) is not.

What it means to us is unimportant, since we do not create the rules, and there are currently no rules to support your argument; or if there are, then you have not stated them.

You keep saying the rules don't support my argument but don't show where or how the argument fails. I'm willing to debate ideas but so far all you have done is post simple dismissive rhetoric like above with out and substance to back it. I've stated where I felt the rules supported my argument. If you think I'm wrong show me where the logic is faulty. Provide the rule set backing up you claim. Provide page numbers to rules.

nosferatu1001 wrote:Instead of using another ranged weapon - so you cant shoot. Thie "another" simply implies it is a ranged weapon - but there are no rules for it, so it isnt.

So if it's done instead of using another ranged weapon when can it be done? Is there anything that ties it to the shooting phase?

It's not a PSA however it is done instead of using another ranged weapon, when can a unit use a ranged weapon? When the unit fires.

The power itself says that it is to be used in the shooting phase. The "instead of", IMHO, is meant to clarify that you can't cast the power and shoot in the same phase.

That would have been (instead of using a ranged weapon)

not instead of using another ranged weapon

Lash of submission isnt a weapon ( Insert exclamation mark here ) (it doesnt cause damage last time I checked)

Lash isn't a PSA due to the FAQ.

So to argue that it is a psychic shooting attack even when an FAQ clearly states it isnt makes the you one of the following: illiterate for being unable to read , incompetent for failing to comprehend it even after it was explained to you multiple times , or TFG who just doesn't like the one power that is good in his opponents codex .

Sorry for being an a$$ or coming off as mean but sometimes some people just need it told to them in a more explicit manner. Hate me if you will, I act to save your opponents from you arguing them into submission. (catch what i did there )



Edited to remove quotes as to not single people out!

By lashes own text "instead of using another ranged weapon"

Lash is a weapon, just not one defined by the BGB

TheGreatAvatar wrote:

Avatar 720 wrote:One part ("...instead of using another ranged weapon.") is, the other part (your interpretation of its meaning) is not.

What it means to us is unimportant, since we do not create the rules, and there are currently no rules to support your argument; or if there are, then you have not stated them.

You keep saying the rules don't support my argument but don't show where or how the argument fails. I'm willing to debate ideas but so far all you have done is post simple dismissive rhetoric like above with out and substance to back it. I've stated where I felt the rules supported my argument. If you think I'm wrong show me where the logic is faulty. Provide the rule set backing up you claim. Provide page numbers to rules.

Nos already pointed it out, whether or not you choose to acknowledge it is your problem.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

jdjamesdean@mail.com wrote:

nosferatu1001 wrote:Instead of using another ranged weapon - so you cant shoot. Thie "another" simply implies it is a ranged weapon - but there are no rules for it, so it isnt.

It's not a PSA however it is done instead of using another ranged weapon, when can a unit use a ranged weapon? When the unit fires.

jdjamesdean@mail.com wrote:By lashes own text "instead of using another ranged weapon"

Lash is a weapon, just not one defined by the BGB

You're not being consistent in your argument.

First you say it's done instead of using another ranged weapon, and try to link it to when ranged weapons are used in order to make your point, however you then go on to state that lash is weapon that is not defined by the rules.

In fact it's not defined as a weapon anywhere. It's a psychic ability. So, in this case, you can use a psychic power or another ranged weapon.
Maybe you would have been happier if they used the word "attack" as opposed to "weapon" but then you would be arguing that Lash is a PSA because it used the word "attack". So it's a no win for the writers in regard to your argument. In either event Lash is neither a ranged weapon nor a PSA. It is a psychic power that is allowed to be used in the shooting phase.

Leo_the_Rat wrote:In fact it's not defined as a weapon anywhere. It's a psychic ability. So, in this case, you can use a psychic power or another ranged weapon.
Maybe you would have been happier if they used the word "attack" as opposed to "weapon" but then you would be arguing that Lash is a PSA because it used the word "attack". So it's a no win for the writers in regard to your argument. In either event Lash is neither a ranged weapon nor a PSA. It is a psychic power that is allowed to be used in the shooting phase.

If it's not a ranged weapon there is no way to use it, as the rules clearly state that its used *edited* instead of another ranged weapon

and yes the writing of the rules are quite terrible


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Avatar 720 wrote:

You're not being consistent in your argument.

First you say it's done instead of using another ranged weapon, and try to link it to when ranged weapons are used in order to make your point, however you then go on to state that lash is weapon that is not defined by the rules.

The BGB defines what a weapon is, however the BGB is not the final say in the 40k universe as we all know.

jdjamesdean@mail.com wrote:

Leo_the_Rat wrote:In fact it's not defined as a weapon anywhere. It's a psychic ability. So, in this case, you can use a psychic power or another ranged weapon.
Maybe you would have been happier if they used the word "attack" as opposed to "weapon" but then you would be arguing that Lash is a PSA because it used the word "attack". So it's a no win for the writers in regard to your argument. In either event Lash is neither a ranged weapon nor a PSA. It is a psychic power that is allowed to be used in the shooting phase.

If it's not a ranged weapon there is no way to use it, as the rules clearly state that its used *edited* instead of another ranged weapon

and yes the writing of the rules are quite terrible

It never once says that the lash IS a ranged weapon though, to say it is is assuming something that the rules do not state, and that is the core issue, the fact that the end result is an assumed meaning. Just because the lash is used instead of another ranged weapon does not make it a ranged weapon for a plethora of reason that have already been stated multiple times over the course of this rather repetative thread.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

Avatar 720 wrote:

You're not being consistent in your argument.

First you say it's done instead of using another ranged weapon, and try to link it to when ranged weapons are used in order to make your point, however you then go on to state that lash is weapon that is not defined by the rules.

The BGB defines what a weapon is, however the BGB is not the final say in the 40k universe as we all know.

I didn't say the rulebook is the final say, I said that you were not being consistent in your argument. You stated that lash was a ranged weapon, and that the BRB does not define lash as a weapon, but nor does the codex, therefore you are not being consistent, since the rules do not define it.

nosferatu1001 wrote:Instead of using another ranged weapon - so you cant shoot. Thie "another" simply implies it is a ranged weapon - but there are no rules for it, so it isnt.

As Nos has already said ^^

The way lash tells you to use it spells it out for you.

Now I ask you how do you use a Non PSA psychic power, that is a ranged weapon?

jdjamesdean@mail.com wrote:

nosferatu1001 wrote:Instead of using another ranged weapon - so you cant shoot. Thie "another" simply implies it is a ranged weapon - but there are no rules for it, so it isnt.

As Nos has already said ^^

The way lash tells you to use it spells it out for you.

Now I ask you how do you use a Non PSA psychic power, that is a ranged weapon?

Care to explain how this quote supports your argument? Or are you simply ignoring the second part of it?

Also, your final question is unimportant, since lash is not a ranged weapon.

Except for the fact it is a ranged weapon.

"Instead of using another ranged weapon"

This right here says Lash is a ranged weapon.

*another*

jdjamesdean@mail.com wrote:Except for the fact it is a ranged weapon.

"Instead of using another ranged weapon"

This right here says Lash is a ranged weapon.

*another*

No, it implies it is a ranged weapon.

Implies =/= Is

Implications are all I need.

Nothing points the other way, all evidence gos towards ranged weapon

Edit **

well probably not, yet this is how I interperate and how we play it in our community. Discussed it with players and TO's alike and we all came to the same consensus.

An implication is NOT a rule, so no, you need more than that.

As for your second senetence, are you simply ignoring the vast majority of evidence given in opposition to your stance?

If it is a ranged weapon, then its use constitutes a shooting attack, therefore making it a psychic shooting attack, which is is not, as it must be specifically stated as such or carry the profile of such a weapon.

/cycle starts over and the thread goes nowhere.

jdjamesdean@mail.com wrote:Implications are all I need.

Nothing points the other way, all evidence gos towards ranged weapon

Edit **

well probably not, yet this is how I interperate and how we play it in our community. Discussed it with players and TO's alike and we all came to the same consensus.

Or you could just say we play are own in house rules.

The thing about warhammer and its rules is that you cant assume. Your assuming based on a poorly worded sentence. Be it the only possible way you can come to your conclusion yet you hold to it as if it were an entire book of support. The sentence can mean several things. You chose the one. Are you right? That is for you and you alone to think at this moment in time. The consensus here says its not a ranged shooting attack, BECAUSE WHO IS IT ATTACKING? It is a lash whip. The reason it cant shoot is because it whips out and grabs the foe moving them. sigh* some people are just hopeless...

Tomb King wrote:

jdjamesdean@mail.com wrote:Implications are all I need.

Nothing points the other way, all evidence gos towards ranged weapon

Edit **

well probably not, yet this is how I interperate and how we play it in our community. Discussed it with players and TO's alike and we all came to the same consensus.

Or you could just say we play are own in house rules.

The thing about warhammer and its rules is that you cant assume. Your assuming based on a poorly worded sentence. Be it the only possible way you can come to your conclusion yet you hold to it as if it were an entire book of support. The sentence can mean several things. You chose the one. Are you right? That is for you and you alone to think at this moment in time. The consensus here says its not a ranged shooting attack, BECAUSE WHO IS IT ATTACKING? It is a lash whip. The reason it cant shoot is because it whips out and grabs the foe moving them. sigh* some people are just hopeless...

Note that it also causes pinning, so who would it be "attacking" the unit that it pinned(possibly). There is an effect on it aside from the movement. This is also seen on one of the C'tan IIRC, I can't recall how it was done there if it's resolved as shooting etc.

Tomb King wrote:sigh* some people are just hopeless...

Remarks like this are what start flame wars and obscenities going back and forth, was this needed, no I don't think so.

Tomb King wrote:sigh* some people are just hopeless...

Remarks like this are what start flame wars and obscenities going back and forth, was this needed, no I don't think so.

I think we've covered all the salient points here really.

The arguments for both sides have been put forth, fairly clearly, t'would seem it's really up to how one RAI here.

.. in a GW book ! Go figure !