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.

 Shas'O...Crap wrote:

 DarknessEternal wrote:

The only thing ambiguous is the motivation of those opposing those rules.

Disagreeing with my opinion is fine, questioning my motivation is BULL. You are insinuating that I am trying to gain some advantage by deliberately breaking the rules, which I am clearly not if you bothered to read my previous posts in this thread.

Uh? The only thing I insinuated about your motivation was that it was ambiguous.

 Happyjew wrote:

 Shas'O...Crap wrote:

nosferatu1001 wrote:
Shaso - reread Modifiers, and note that Set Value is a type of modifier.

Using BS2, then setting it to BS1 complies with both the rules for using the DC BS AND the Snapshot rules.

The FAQ most certainly DOES apply

You know Nos, I believe Beast was correct in our previous back in forth (then the back and forth that you and he engaged in) on another thread, you're just a disagreeable Chap! Fool me once, shame on you, I'll be damned if I'll let you get away with it again! You don't bother to address any specific points I made, which were that my contention is that Snapfire, CFDS, and DC BS are ALL Set Values.

Snapfire SETS to BS 1, CFDS SETS to BS 2, Drone Controller SETS drones BS to the Bearer of the DC.

Therefore a specific FAQ regarding the DC and how it interacts with other wargear is REQUIRED!

Beast was also right about the Ignore Feature, simply amazing!

 DarknessEternal wrote:

Cmdr Hindsight wrote:
Well, i guess pending a FAQ

That's the thing though, there's already a FAQ. The rules are 100% clear on this subject.

The only thing ambiguous is the motivation of those opposing those rules.

Disagreeing with my opinion is fine, questioning my motivation is BULL. You are insinuating that I am trying to gain some advantage by deliberately breaking the rules, which I am clearly not if you bothered to read my previous posts in this thread.

The rules are not 100% clear, as evidenced by this very thread!

Shas'o:
First - attack the post, not the poster,
Second - Using the BS of the Controller, is a modifier. Agree or disagree
Third - Unless you have specific permission you cannot modify the BS1 of Snap Shots. Agree or Disagree?
Fourth - Drone Controllers do not give specific permission to override the BS1 of Snap Shots. Agree or Disagree?
Fifth - what exactly is your point that nos is not addressing?

First - The 'attack' as you call it has more to do with Nos' overall posting history, specifically it came to a head in a previous thread, and his previous post to which I replied was him pushing it over the top; it was more or less me not putting up with his particular style anymore. Yes, I know the rest of you aren't privy to that particular exchange, suffice to say, he was rather off-putting then, and nothing has changed since. I have nothing against him personally, and I'm sure he is indeed a decent Chap, just a disagreeable one on internet forums.

Second - Agree (though GW's use of grammar is appalling, replacing is not modifying, regardless of whether or not GW says it is), with a caveat: The specific things mentioned in that FAQ have nothing in their own rules regarding Overwatch, a CFDS clearly does, and a DC makes no mention either way, while other wargear in theTau Codex does (C&C Node and MSSS). Why would they expressly exclude these but not the DC and its interactions with things like VT and CFDS? FAQ is needed.

Third - Agreed

Fourth - This is where is gets fuzzy, and why I believe a specific FAQ regarding the DC is required; No, the DC itself does not give permission to Override the BS1 of Snapshots, however I believe it does without actually saying so, as the wording for it straight up says that the Drones are using the bearers BS not their own (ever, until the model with the DC is killed), and in the case of a CFDS would indeed be BS2.

Fifth - My point regarding my contention that Snapfire, CFDS, and DC BS are all set values, and as such what order do they get applied in? Set Values always override everything else, who is to say which one overrides which other? FAQ needed. I did include this again in my 'attack' on Nos.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 DarknessEternal wrote:

 Shas'O...Crap wrote:

 DarknessEternal wrote:

The only thing ambiguous is the motivation of those opposing those rules.

Disagreeing with my opinion is fine, questioning my motivation is BULL. You are insinuating that I am trying to gain some advantage by deliberately breaking the rules, which I am clearly not if you bothered to read my previous posts in this thread.

Uh? The only thing I insinuated about your motivation was that it was ambiguous.

Thus implying that I had ill intentions.

Shas'o argument:

"No, the DC itself does not give permission to Override the BS1 of Snapshots, however I believe it does without actually saying so, as the wording for it straight up says that the Drones are using the bearers BS not their own (ever, until the model with the DC is killed), and in the case of a CFDS would indeed be BS2. "

Then it does not give permission to override snap shot.

Your argument is conceded, and your attack reported.

nosferatu1001 wrote:
Shas'o argument:

"No, the DC itself does not give permission to Override the BS1 of Snapshots, however I believe it does without actually saying so, as the wording for it straight up says that the Drones are using the bearers BS not their own (ever, until the model with the DC is killed), and in the case of a CFDS would indeed be BS2. "

Then it does not give permission to override snap shot.

Your argument is conceded, and your attack reported.

Not to stray too far from the topic but...you can't tell someone they concede their position. They can concede if they wish but it's not really your choice.

 Shas'O...Crap wrote:

Fourth - This is where is gets fuzzy, and why I believe a specific FAQ regarding the DC is required; No, the DC itself does not give permission to Override the BS1 of Snapshots, however I believe it does without actually saying so, as the wording for it straight up says that the Drones are using the bearers BS not their own (ever, until the model with the DC is killed), and in the case of a CFDS would indeed be BS2.

Fifth - My point regarding my contention that Snapfire, CFDS, and DC BS are all set values, and as such what order do they get applied in? Set Values always override everything else, who is to say which one overrides which other? FAQ needed. I did include this again in my 'attack' on Nos.

Therein lies the flaw with your argument.

In the example of the FAQ ruling, they use Telion, whose ability ALSO allows another model to use Telion's BS instead of its own (just like the Drone Controller does). So if using another model's BS in that case is specifically given as an example of something that does not work, then there is no logical reason that we can assume the Drone Controller to be an exception until GW says otherwise.

And while there can be arguments made about the order of set modifiers being applied, again with the ruling GW has already made on the subject we have examples of two set modifiers conflicting with each other (Telion's rule vs. snap shots) and GW made it abundantly clear which one takes precedence in this case (snap shots).

So if GW wants to change this, they should FAQ it, but until then, the EXISTING FAQ THEY ALREADY HAVE COVERING THIS EXACT SITUATION IS PERFECTLY CLEAR.

The *only* thing they'd need to do (if they even wanted) would be to add 'Tau Drone Controller' to the list of examples given in that FAQ question. But those are *examples*, which makes it a non-exhaustive list by definition.

tidalwake wrote:Not to stray too far from the topic but...you can't tell someone they concede their position. They can concede if they wish but it's not really your choice.

You can tell them that they have effectively conceded their position through the argument they have presented being shown to be incorrect. This is what I was showing - that because their argument is flawed, and defeated by existing rules, their position has been conceded.

That's not what "concede" means.

nosferatu1001 wrote:

tidalwake wrote:Not to stray too far from the topic but...you can't tell someone they concede their position. They can concede if they wish but it's not really your choice.

You can tell them that they have effectively conceded their position through the argument they have presented being shown to be incorrect. This is what I was showing - that because their argument is flawed, and defeated by existing rules, their position has been conceded.

LOL... You COULD tell them that Nos, but you would just be putting words in their mouth that they actively refute... I think what might be a more polite statement is: "I think I have proven your position to be incorrect." The way you worded your response comes across (on an impersonal forum) as arrogant in the extreme and is obviously not something he believes or accepts... To rail against that as you have done merely makes you appear even more peevish about it and completely undermines your credibility...

Cheers!

So, you contribute nothing to this thread but an attack?

Nice one.

nosferatu1001 wrote:
So, you contribute nothing to this thread but an attack?

Nice one.

Actually, just tryin' to help you out Nos (so people will take your position, which I am beginning to agree with, more seriously)... So you viewed that as an attack somehow? Odd but whatever...

"even more peevish"

If you want to continue with this OT'ness, PM

lol "you can lead a horse to water, but you can't make him drink" I guess...

I see now. Those who are saying "no" are looking at all "snap Shots", and those saying "Maybe/Yes" are looking at only Overwatch. Both Telion, and the signum rules appear to be closer to the Tau's Signature Systems, than that of the Drone Controller. In being they can only be used in the shooting phase. And still not having access to the full rules for these two items leaves me with this conclusion, alone. Moving and Firing a heavy weapon, or firing at a airborne target modify the BS of a unit as a whole(unless it has the split fire ability) as units typically can not split their attacks. So when a unit moves and fires a heavy weapon then Tellions guidance is of no help as he can't fire a heavy weapon @ BS 5, because even he is reduced to BS 1 in this case. If Tellion has Relentless or Slow and Purposeful then maybe they would have allowed him to transfer his BS to another model. Even if he targets a flyer(remember the whole unit must fire at the same target, with the same caveat as before) and elects not to shoot, he still has targeted the flyer so has BS 1 for those shots. Maybe if he had skyfire they would allow the transfer of his BS 5.

The rules, as I can make out with only partial information, do not seem to preclude transferring a BS modified by an ability that adjusts another rule. The fact that other abilities in the codex in question specifically deny their use, while this one does not, does open the door for this question, and the interpretations of those involved.

 megatrons2nd wrote:
If Tellion has Relentless or Slow and Purposeful then maybe they would have allowed him to transfer his BS to another model. Even if he targets a flyer(remember the whole unit must fire at the same target, with the same caveat as before) and elects not to shoot, he still has targeted the flyer so has BS 1 for those shots. Maybe if he had skyfire they would allow the transfer of his BS 5.

I just want to say, giving Telion the option to skyfire would be amazing. "Shoot it down!"

 megatrons2nd wrote:
I see now. Those who are saying "no" are looking at all "snap Shots", and those saying "Maybe/Yes" are looking at only Overwatch. Both Telion, and the signum rules appear to be closer to the Tau's Signature Systems, than that of the Drone Controller. In being they can only be used in the shooting phase. And still not having access to the full rules for these two items leaves me with this conclusion, alone. Moving and Firing a heavy weapon, or firing at a airborne target modify the BS of a unit as a whole(unless it has the split fire ability) as units typically can not split their attacks. So when a unit moves and fires a heavy weapon then Tellions guidance is of no help as he can't fire a heavy weapon @ BS 5, because even he is reduced to BS 1 in this case. If Tellion has Relentless or Slow and Purposeful then maybe they would have allowed him to transfer his BS to another model. Even if he targets a flyer(remember the whole unit must fire at the same target, with the same caveat as before) and elects not to shoot, he still has targeted the flyer so has BS 1 for those shots. Maybe if he had skyfire they would allow the transfer of his BS 5.

The rules, as I can make out with only partial information, do not seem to preclude transferring a BS modified by an ability that adjusts another rule. The fact that other abilities in the codex in question specifically deny their use, while this one does not, does open the door for this question, and the interpretations of those involved.

First off: When a unit fires at a zooming flyer, the entire unit is not suddenly struck down to BS1. The rules actually say:

Shots resolved at a Zooming Flyer can only be resolved as Snap Shots unless the model or weapon has the Skyfire special rule (as described on page 42).


So only the SHOTS are resolved at BS1. Any model that chooses not to fire is not firing any shots and therefore by definition those shots cannot be modified to BS1 by the snap shots rule.

So Telion's BS is not being reduced to 1 when other models in his unit are firing snap shots.


Second, when some models in a unit move and fire with heavy weapons, ONLY THOSE MODELS fire snap shots. The rest of the models in the unit do not. So again, if some models in Telion's unit move and fire heavy weapons, Telion's BS is not reduced and can be passed onto other models...which is precisely why it is important that this FAQ covers that such abilities do NOT override the snap shot rule and these shots are still resolved at BS1. Without GW's existing FAQ answer, we would have a conflict that would be unresolved.


Or in short, pretty much everything you wrote in the above post was factually incorrect...firing MODELS have the BS of their shots reduced when firing snap shots, UNITS do not.

And more importantly, what does everyone think this ruling by GW actually means?

Q: Can the BS1 of a Snap Shot ever be modified by special rules that modify the BS of a model’s Shooting attack (such as Space Marine Signums or Sergeant Telion’s Voice of Experience)? (p13)
A: No.

The question is specifically asking if any special rules that MODIFY the BS of a model's shooting attack affect snap shots. They give two examples, but those are only examples (not an exhaustive list), but Telion's ability is an ability that REPLACES the model's own BS with another model's BS, which is precisely what the Drone Controller does.

So it does not matter if the model with the Drone Controller gets to fire at BS10 at fliers, the ability in question here is the Drone Controller, as IT is what passes that improved BS onto the drones. And this FAQ is explicitly clear that abilities which modify a firer's BS DO NOT affect snap shots.

That leaves ONLY abilities which specifically say that they affect snap shots as the ONLY things that can possibly affect snap shots.

Beast wrote:
lol "you can lead a horse to water, but you can't make him drink" I guess...

Again, OT. PM if you wish to continue, as your "help" is not asked for or wanted.

Maybe I over explained my thought process a bit.


Does Tellion have SnP, Skyfire, Relentless? No on all, correct? So, how does this differ from the Drone controller, and the CDS? If Tellion were using the Heavy weapon after moving, what would his BS be? If the Tau Commander with CDS was firing the Markerlight while Overwatching, what would his BS be?

Now apply those answers to the other model, what do you get? A Tellion upgraded firer at BS 1, and a Drone at BS 2.

 megatrons2nd wrote:
Maybe I over explained my thought process a bit.


Does Tellion have SnP, Skyfire, Relentless? No on all, correct? So, how does this differ from the Drone controller, and the CDS? If Tellion were using the Heavy weapon after moving, what would his BS be? If the Tau Commander with CDS was firing the Markerlight while Overwatching, what would his BS be?

Now apply those answers to the other model, what do you get? A Tellion upgraded firer at BS 1, and a Drone at BS 2.

So you are modifying the BS1 of Snap Shots without specific permission?

edit: redacted as a later post dealt with the issue.

 Drunkspleen wrote:

 yakface wrote:
In the example of the FAQ ruling, they use Telion, whose ability ALSO allows another model to use Telion's BS instead of its own (just like the Drone Controller does).

Actually I would argue Telion's case is different since it specifically references his unmodified BS of 6 in the wording of the rule, it could not work for a number of reasons, not least of which is, Telion doesn't have a BS of 6 while his squad is resolving snap shots.

So if the whole squad, except Telion moves, at what BS would Telion fire at?

Sorry for the threadomancy, but I was out of town for the weekend and did not have access to the internet way up in the Mountains.

With regards to the Tellion/Signum FAQ that everybody keeps citing is that each them (Telion/Signum) are utilizing ONE special rule to modify another models BS. The crux of the problem for me is that the wording for the DC and CFDS combine (read as TWO special rules) in such a way as to become greater than the sum of their parts.

The DC specifically says that all drones in a unit that has at least one DC will use the bearer of DCs BS, it does not say may, therefore it is a requirement that they use the DC bearer's BS. The Counter-fire Defence (gotta love British English versus American English) System specifically says that a model equipped with one fires Overwatch at BS 2. Therefore, I deduce that the Drone Controller COMBINED with the Counter-fire Defence System does requires Drones to OVerwatch at BS 2.

I will also say that anything that specifically affects the DC bearer's BS in a negative way, such as Ezekiel's Mind Worm Power on a Tau Commander with a DC would force any drones (assuming there are no other DCs in the unit) to abide by it. For example, if Ezekiel managed to inflict two unsaved wounds on the aforementioned Commander, thus forcing the Commander's BS down to 1, the drones would now be shooting at BS1 in their own shooting, phase, just as the Commander would be, per the wording of the DC. Coincidentally, if the Commander were also equipped with a CFDS he would Overwatch at BS2, even though he is BS1 (which, on its face is pretty dumb, but to me that seems to be the RAW), and I contend that any drones in his unit would also be able to do so. This (Mind Worm situation) is obviously pretty asinine, and not likely to be RAI, however given the wording of all of these special rules combined, I just can't see any other logical deduction to make.

It is these interactions that make me have the opinion that not only does it work the way I contend, but that it needs a specific FAQ regarding the Drone Controller, as it is a bit more complicated than Telion/Signum special rules. If having a DC can become a potential liability (see Mind Worm situation above), then it should also provide the benefits, specifically Overwatch at BS 2 for Drones, and Skyfire for Drones when a Velocity Tracker is added.

For the record, if/when it is FAQed, I would not be surprised to find myself on the loosing side of it, but as it is now, I just can't see it playing any other way given the requirement aspect of it and the unusual wargear/special rules interactions.

I also see the possibility for a split decision on the hopefully forthcoming FAQ, such as by adding the word 'may' to the DC entry (thereby allowing drones whose DC model has been Mind Wormed to use their own BS of 2), while simultaneously making a specific exception, much like the C&C Node and MSSS, forbidding it's functioning during Overwatch, etc.

Interesting argument, I think I'd err on the side of BS1 versus the BS2; the more restrictive versus the less until a FAQ arises. I think this is one of the few times we need a specific clarification on how two pieces of wargear interact.

 Shas'O...Crap wrote:
Sorry for the threadomancy, but I was out of town for the weekend and did not have access to the internet way up in the Mountains.

With regards to the Tellion/Signum FAQ that everybody keeps citing is that each them (Telion/Signum) are utilizing ONE special rule to modify another models BS. The crux of the problem for me is that the wording for the DC and CFDS combine (read as TWO special rules) in such a way as to become greater than the sum of their parts.

The DC specifically says that all drones in a unit that has at least one DC will use the bearer of DCs BS, it does not say may, therefore it is a requirement that they use the DC bearer's BS. The Counter-fire Defence (gotta love British English versus American English) System specifically says that a model equipped with one fires Overwatch at BS 2. Therefore, I deduce that the Drone Controller COMBINED with the Counter-fire Defence System does requires Drones to OVerwatch at BS 2.

I will also say that anything that specifically affects the DC bearer's BS in a negative way, such as Ezekiel's Mind Worm Power on a Tau Commander with a DC would force any drones (assuming there are no other DCs in the unit) to abide by it. For example, if Ezekiel managed to inflict two unsaved wounds on the aforementioned Commander, thus forcing the Commander's BS down to 1, the drones would now be shooting at BS1 in their own shooting, phase, just as the Commander would be, per the wording of the DC. Coincidentally, if the Commander were also equipped with a CFDS he would Overwatch at BS2, even though he is BS1 (which, on its face is pretty dumb, but to me that seems to be the RAW), and I contend that any drones in his unit would also be able to do so. This (Mind Worm situation) is obviously pretty asinine, and not likely to be RAI, however given the wording of all of these special rules combined, I just can't see any other logical deduction to make.

It is these interactions that make me have the opinion that not only does it work the way I contend, but that it needs a specific FAQ regarding the Drone Controller, as it is a bit more complicated than Telion/Signum special rules. If having a DC can become a potential liability (see Mind Worm situation above), then it should also provide the benefits, specifically Overwatch at BS 2 for Drones, and Skyfire for Drones when a Velocity Tracker is added.

For the record, if/when it is FAQed, I would not be surprised to find myself on the loosing side of it, but as it is now, I just can't see it playing any other way given the requirement aspect of it and the unusual wargear/special rules interactions.

I also see the possibility for a split decision on the hopefully forthcoming FAQ, such as by adding the word 'may' to the DC entry (thereby allowing drones whose DC model has been Mind Wormed to use their own BS of 2), while simultaneously making a specific exception, much like the C&C Node and MSSS, forbidding it's functioning during Overwatch, etc.

It doesn't matter how many different special rules or pieces of wargear are involved. At the end of the day the question is whether the BS of the Drone Controller model (granted by the Drone Controller ability) takes precedence over the set BS1 of snap shots...and that is it.

Of COURSE if the Drone Controller's BS gets lowered (or raised) these pass onto the Drones in any other (non-snap shot) situation, but that's a red herring because again it is not directly related to the question at hand.

The Drone Controller ability is functionally identical to Telion's ability, and a FAQ published by GW has been written to specifically answer the question we have been arguing about incessantly...we want them to FAQ it, but the FAQ has already been written and it exists.

The only thing they would need to do is just to add 'Drone Controller' to the list of examples, and nothing else would need to be changed in the FAQ wording. But those examples are not exhaustive, so the fact that Drone Controller is not currently listed as an example shouldn't cause people to ignore what the FAQ question and answer actually say, and what they say is: The snap shot BS1 cannot be overridden by special rules that modify a model's BS...and one of the examples given (Telion) clearly shows that when they're talking about modifying a model's BS, they're also talking about using a 2nd model's BS instead of the firer's own BS.

So the FAQ question exists and already answers the question that keeps being asked. Maybe GW comes back and makes the Drone Controller an exception in the Tau FAQ (great if they do), but for now the FAQ is painfully clear despite what everyone keeps trying to imply.

Excepting the fact that the FAQ is limited by a models that have no further special rules that also effect the BS. If Tellion had SnP, Skyfire, or Relentless I wouldn't find the FAQ entry to be a less than stellar example.

As Tellion does not, how is using the BS of a model with a rule that assists in BS for these situations effect the other models?

If Tellion moved and fired a heavy weapon his BS is 1.
If Tellion fires at a flying model his BS is 1.
If Tellion fires overwatch his BS is 1.
A DC Commander with skyfire uses BS 5.
A DC Commander with CFDS uses BS 2 for overwatch.
The Drones use the Commanders BS.

Tellion must forgo his shooting to pass on his BS, so his BS is never going to be modified by snap-shots or the like. So there's no difference between the DC Commander with skyfire and Tellion as far as the pleb(s) receiving his BS are concerned when they are shooting at flyers.

 yakface wrote:


The Drone Controller ability is functionally identical to Telion's ability, and a FAQ published by GW has been written to specifically answer the question we have been arguing about incessantly...we want them to FAQ it, but the FAQ has already been written and it exists.

(Emphasis Added)

Technically, Yak, the DC and Telion's special rule are not functionally identical. In order to make use of the Drone Controller, one must simply equip a model with one, it is always 'on'. In order to make use of Telion's Special Rule, one must make a declarative action expressing intent to use it. Furthermore, Telion does not himself have any ability to fire Overwatch at anything but BS1 (which I believe is the true reason and intent behind the FAQ that so many of you continue to cite), whereas a Tau Battlesuit can, if it takes the appropriate wargear. Couple that with the requirement that all drones must use the BS of the bearer of the DC, and voila, instant rules disagreement. This is precisely why the DC needs it's own FAQ, especially regarding the interactions it has with other pieces of wargear, and what, if any, affect there is on any drones in the unit. The Telion FAQ is, in my opinion, is to vague to properly deal with this particular situation.

On a completely unrelated topic, when did you change your Avatar? I liked the old one better.

 Shas'O...Crap wrote:


(Emphasis Added)

Technically, Yak, the DC and Telion's special rule are not functionally identical. In order to make use of the Drone Controller, one must simply equip a model with one, it is always 'on'. In order to make use of Telion's Special Rule, one must make a declarative action expressing intent to use it. Furthermore, Telion does not himself have any ability to fire Overwatch at anything but BS1 (which I believe is the true reason and intent behind the FAQ that so many of you continue to cite), whereas a Tau Battlesuit can, if it takes the appropriate wargear. Couple that with the requirement that all drones must use the BS of the bearer of the DC, and voila, instant rules disagreement. This is precisely why the DC needs it's own FAQ, especially regarding the interactions it has with other pieces of wargear, and what, if any, affect there is on any drones in the unit. The Telion FAQ is, in my opinion, is to vague to properly deal with this particular situation.

On a completely unrelated topic, when did you change your Avatar? I liked the old one better.

Its not a 'Telion' FAQ, it is a FAQ covering ALL modification of BS vs. snap shots. It is written to cover EVERY instance, which means it applies in EVERY instance unless the rule actually goes out of its way to say that it applies to snap shots.

Telion just happens to be one of the examples mentioned in the ruling that IS functionally identical to the Drone Controller. All those other elements you mention have literally nothing to do with the matter at hand, which is: can a higher BS be passed from one model to another to supersede the snap shot BS1 restriction? In that regard, the situations are functionally identical. Telion is not firing, and therefore his BS is not being reduced so we have a situation where a higher BS is being passed via a special rule onto another model which is making snap shots and the FAQ clearly states that the snap shot BS1 takes precedence.

I get that you feel it deserves its own FAQ, but what I am saying (for like the 80th time) is that you have to recognize that if GW doesn't ever get around to giving the Drone Controller its own FAQ answer, there is a perfectly workable ruling already on the books answering this exact question.

It may not be the answer you like and it may not be as specific as you'd like (actually mentioning Drone Controller as a listed example), but the FAQ necessary is already there.


----


And I changed my Avatar back when we did 'Waaagh Dakka' (click the banner in my sig for more info)...but don't worry, my old Avatar pic has not gone away forever, its just resting.

 Shas'O...Crap wrote:

 yakface wrote:


The Drone Controller ability is functionally identical to Telion's ability, and a FAQ published by GW has been written to specifically answer the question we have been arguing about incessantly...we want them to FAQ it, but the FAQ has already been written and it exists.

(Emphasis Added)

Technically, Yak, the DC and Telion's special rule are not functionally identical.

whereas a Tau Battlesuit can, if it takes the appropriate wargear.

Couple that with the requirement that all drones must use the BS of the bearer of the DC, and voila, instant rules disagreement. This is precisely why the DC needs it's own FAQ, especially regarding the interactions it has with other pieces of wargear, and what, if any, affect there is on any drones in the unit.

The Telion FAQ is, in my opinion, is to vague to properly deal with this particular situation.

Your right, Telions rule is not identical, but in the context we are discussing here it is.

Exactly right, the the battlesuit has specific rules to override the blanket sweeping statement that all snap shots are resolved at bs1. The drones do not have that special rule.

As to instant rule disagreement nope, the drones are snap shooting so resolve at bs1. Remember the previous FAQ, where the old Tau codex said seeker missiles always hit on a 2plus?, it was FAQ'ed to say not while they are firing at hard to hit target what is needed to hit, the 2plus your old codex said or a 6?, guess what it was the 6 yes it is the old codex which is now outdated but you can easily see the preceedent. The interaction with other wargear is moot unless the drone has specific exemptations to the snap shots which it does not.

The Telion FAQ is in fact pretty broad

I agree with yak's logic, but I think that eight points and a system slot is fairly pricey for something that usually amounts to plus one BS on what is generally already a twin linked platform. Faq will sort it out, but until then I think its no dice.

 Phazael wrote:
I agree with yak's logic, but I think that eight points and a system slot is fairly pricey for something that usually amounts to plus one BS on what is generally already a twin linked platform.

Going from BS2 to BS3 while twin-linked is actually a relatively significant improvement: +35% hits. For instance, it's more improvement than going from BS3 to BS4 while not twin-linked (~33%), despite being more likely to hit both at the lower and higher end. It's not like going from BS4 to BS5 while twin-linked, which is only a small improvement (~9%).

BS1 w/ re-roll hits 11/36.
BS2 w/ re-roll hits 20/36 (or 5/9).
BS3 w/ re-roll hits 27/36 (or 3/4).
BS4 w/ re-roll hits 32/36 (or 8/9).
BS5+ w/ re-roll hits 35/36.

Plus, y'know, drone controllers tend to end up on the higher BS HQ's anyway.