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.

So, new ruleset out with 6th Edition, does Anrakyr's Mind in the Machine Special rule work with him embarked on a vehicle now?
Im on the fence on this one. Heres why;

Pg 62 Necron Codex wrote:
Mind in the Machine:At the start of your Shooting phase, choose an enemy vehicle within 18" and in Anrakyr's line of sight and roll a D6. On a roll of 3+, Anrakyr overrides the targeting systems in that vehicle - you can immediately shoot with it as if it were your unit. The vehicle cannot alter its facing, and fires as if it had not moved. For the purposes of this attack, ignore any 'crew stunned' or 'crew shaken' results the target is suffering from - but destroyed weapons cannot be fired. Once these shooting attacks have been resolved, the vehicle returns to your opponent's control.

So, what we can take from this is that:

You need to draw Line of Sight to the enemy model, you are given permission to draw Line of Sight with this as its written.

If the enemy vehicle is within 18", you may roll a D6 and on 3+, you may fire any of its weapons. You may not move the vehicle, but any weapon systems are at your disposal.

You may ignore any effects that prevent you from firing all the vehicles weapon systems unless they are destroyed.

After resolving your last shot, you return control of the vehicles shooting platforms back to your opponent.

A few things that we must go to for further support is that Anrakyr is embarked on a vehicle. Most likely a Catacomb Command Barge, but not limited to that and Ghost Arks. Ill get to these in a moment.

Pg 82 BRB, Open-Topped Vehicles wrote:
Passengers Shooting from Open-Topped Transports
Open-topped Transports do not have specific Fire Points. Instead, all passengers in an Open-topped Transport can fire, measuring range and line of sight from any point on the hull of the vehicle.

So, this rule here gives us how to draw LoS. Now, I do understand that this is specific for firing weapons and MitM is most defiantly not a Shooting Attack. The rule does state that we are given Permission to draw LoS, so we must see how we draw LoS for the vehicle he is embarked on. As above states, You draw LoS to fire in this fashion. With the Codex' ability to trump the BRB, it only needs to know how to draw LoS.

The biggest part that MitM has against it is drawing LoS to use its rule.

Permission is given by Open-Topped Vehicles to draw LoS, but only to fire.

Codex trumping this, it does so, but 'sideways' in fashion, one could most defiantly argue it going either way.

What say you Dakka?

The rules aren't worded that differently between 5th and 6th.
You don't have permission to draw LOS for anything but shooting.

Xzerios wrote:

Pg 82 BRB, Open-Topped Vehicles wrote:
Passengers Shooting from Open-Topped Transports
Open-topped Transports do not have specific Fire Points. Instead, all passengers in an Open-topped Transport can fire, measuring range and line of sight from any point on the hull of the vehicle.

So, this rule here gives us how to draw LoS. Now, I do understand that this is specific for firing weapons and MitM is most defiantly not a Shooting Attack. The rule does state that we are given Permission to draw LoS, so we must see how we draw LoS for the vehicle he is embarked on. As above states, You draw LoS to fire in this fashion. With the Codex' ability to trump the BRB, it only needs to know how to draw LoS.

There are a few things that you're missing. First has to do with the quote I highlighted from the BBB. What you missed is that the "measuring range and LOS from..." is a sentence fragment, meaning it is entirely dependent upon the first half of the sentence. That tells us specifically that we can measure range and LOS from an open-topped vehicle only when we're shooting a unit from inside. What you've tried to imply in the sentence you gave that I highlighted, is that "measuring range and LOS from..." is it's own stand alone sentence, when it has dependence on the first half, measuring range and line of sight from any point on the hull of the vehicle, is ONLY done when passengers fire. The other part you missed is in the wording for MitM itself. The important part is "and in Anrakyr's Line of Sight." What your missing is, show a rule that allows you to draw line of sight from a vehicle at a time other than shooting. We'll wait until you can find it, but I think we'll all be a bit greyer in the hair and longer in the tooth before you find it, since it would only be found in a new FAQ or new edition. You have no permission other than to shoot to draw line of sight, so until MitM is FAQed to be a shooting attack, Anrakyr's mind isn't going to be affecting machines.

rigeld2 wrote:
The rules aren't worded that differently between 5th and 6th.
You don't have permission to draw LOS for anything but shooting.

Agreed. And given that psykers cannot hit targets needing LOS from inside a transport, unless its a PSA, I can see them applying that to this.

Why would you use the rules for shooting from open topped vehicles when you're not shooting? The rules are actually quite clear. You have no permission to use a fire point to draw line of sight for a model's special rules. Therefore Anrakyr can not use Mind in the Machine while embarked.

Fragile wrote:
And given that psykers cannot hit targets needing LOS from inside a transport, unless its a PSA...

Yeah, if anything the rules were more friendly to the idea in 5th edition than in 6th edition. In 5th edition, it didn't work because it wasn't a psychic power - in 6th edition, it wouldn't even work if it was a psychic power!

They really ought to get around to definitively FAQ-ing that (non-PSA) abilities either can or cannot draw LOS from transport vehicles one of these days...

 Neorealist wrote:
They really ought to get around to definitively FAQ-ing that (non-PSA) abilities either can or cannot draw LOS from transport vehicles one of these days...

Like they did in 5th with no significant rules changes pertaining to LOS from vehicles?

No, not really. In 5th and again in 6th they've more or less left it with the 'It doesn't say you can so you can not' pseudo-rule, with a few specific exceptions scattered here or there.

What i'd like is an explicit blanket statement to the effect of: "You can(or can not) draw LOS from access points on a transport vehicle for all reasons that call for such unless the ability specifically states otherwise." in an FAQ somewhere.

Neorealist wrote:In 5th and again in 6th they've more or less left it with the 'It doesn't say you can so you can not' pseudo-rule...

So you want a 10,000+ page FAQ listing everything you can't do?

Please refer to my prior post to see 'what i want', rather than making an only tangically related interpretation of same.

Yes, Mind in the Machine works from a CCBarge.

The only thing that had previously prevented it from working was the final 5th Ed. FAQ, which no longer applies.

Pg 62 Necron Codex wrote:
Mind in the Machine:At the start of your Shooting phase, choose an enemy vehicle within 18" and in Anrakyr's line of sight and roll a D6. On a roll of 3+, Anrakyr overrides the targeting systems in that vehicle - you can immediately shoot with it as if it were your unit. The vehicle cannot alter its facing, and fires as if it had not moved. For the purposes of this attack, ignore any 'crew stunned' or 'crew shaken' results the target is suffering from - but destroyed weapons cannot be fired. Once these shooting attacks have been resolved, the vehicle returns to your opponent's control.

This rule, listed above, gives you permission to draw LOS. The first sentence. It makes no distinction between being embarked or not. It just simply says that you choose an enemy vehicle within 18" and LOS. This is a blanket statement indicating that if these two requirements must be met (range and LOS).

Pg 82 BRB, Open-Topped Vehicles wrote:
Passengers Shooting from Open-Topped Transports
Open-topped Transports do not have specific Fire Points. Instead, all passengers in an Open-topped Transport can fire, measuring range and line of sight from any point on the hull of the vehicle.

None of this matters as Anrakyr's MitM is not a shooting attack.

Now, I have not seen a rule which specifies that non-shooting attacks may not be used while embarked in a transport. But the permission to draw LOS is given to you by the MitM rule in the Necron codex, which does not qualify itself with a location that it can or cannot be used from. So unless there is an actual written rule that says you cannot use non-shooting attacks that require LOS (which would be arguably more specific than Anrakyr's ability), then the MitM ability is all that it needed for permission to draw LOS, since that rule tells you to do so.

Sorry, but you're wrong. Anrakyr's rules do not give you permission to draw line pa sigh from s vehicle. What it does do is require line of sight, nothing more.

LOS for Anrakyr is not a permission, it's a requirement.

 Neorealist wrote:
No, not really. In 5th and again in 6th they've more or less left it with the 'It doesn't say you can so you can not' pseudo-rule, with a few specific exceptions scattered here or there.

No, really, the the final 5th Ed brb FAQ they said you cannot trace Los for anything but PSAs and shooting. MITM is neither of those.
Since the surrounding rules haven't changed, and that FAQ didn't change a rule, simply clarified, there's no reason to think it does work.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 azazel the cat wrote:
This is a blanket statement indicating that if these two requirements must be met (range and LOS).

Yes, it states requirements. It doesn't state that you will always be able to meet them. There's no permission to always draw Los - for example, if there's a wall between you and your target, you cannot draw Los.

None of this matters as Anrakyr's MitM is not a shooting attack.

Only shooting attacks have permission to draw Los from an open topped vehicle. As you've said, MitM is not a shooting attack, therefore does not have permission.

rigeld2 wrote:

 Neorealist wrote:
No, not really. In 5th and again in 6th they've more or less left it with the 'It doesn't say you can so you can not' pseudo-rule, with a few specific exceptions scattered here or there.

No, really, the the final 5th Ed brb FAQ they said you cannot trace Los for anything but PSAs and shooting. MITM is neither of those.
Since the surrounding rules haven't changed, and that FAQ didn't change a rule, simply clarified, there's no reason to think it does work.

That's in the 5th Ed. FAQ, yes? As in, the FAQ for the rules set we no longer use? Please stop citing it as a relevant source. It is no longer any more relevant than the 2nd Ed. FAQs or the rules for Dreadfleet.

Azazel - rigeld didnt, just pointing out the FAQ didnt change the 5th edition rules either.

The rules for MitM require him to HAVE LOS, not the he may ALWAYS draw LOS.

Pyrian wrote:LOS for Anrakyr is not a permission, it's a requirement.

I don't read it that way.

I read "At the start of your Shooting phase, choose an enemy vehicle within 18" and in Anrakyr's line of sight and roll a D6" to imply that you are meant to draw LOS for this ability and from this ability.

And just for gaks and giggles, pg. 8 of the BRB says that "Naturally, you can't ask your models what they can see - they're plastic and resin, which is always a barrier to effective communication - therefore, you'll have to work it out on their behalf. In many cases, this will be obvious - if there's a hill, building or monster in the way, the enemy might be blatantly out of sight. In other cases, two units will be clearly in view of each other as there is nothing at all in the way. On those other occasions, where it's not entirely obvious whether or not one unit can see another, the player will have to stoop over the battlefield and look from behind the model's head for a 'model's eye view'."

Now, that sounds to me like they're saying that whenever LOS isn't obvious, you should determine it. Combine that with pg. 4 of the BRB, which says "You can always check distance at any time."

How I would read these rules as a gestalt implies that if you need LOS, then just fething test for LOS.

Considering 40k used True Line of Sight since 5th edition. I think MitM is pretty clearly able to function from the CCB as it is the most obvious transport to draw LOS from the passenger. Namely because you can physically mount Anrakyr on the CCB and measure to an from him for LOS purposes. The rules about embarked units are obviously more or less designed for the majority of vehicles which don't have the advantage of being modeled in this way.

While the open topped rule doesnt give specific permission to use non-shooting attacks from them, it does set a precedent for drawing los from an open topped vehicle.

This delving into RAI I know, but it seems odd that a model becomes blind in a transport unless he pulls a trigger.

Azazel - ok, so get behind your model and determine LOS.

Oh wait, not on the board, so you cannot do that

So, where do you find permission to draw LOS from in the 6th edition ruleset? Firepoints, but only for shooting.

So, is MitM shooting? No? then you have no permission to draw LOS from within the vehicle.

Necronlord3 - utter lack of rules there

 azazel the cat wrote:

Pyrian wrote:LOS for Anrakyr is not a permission, it's a requirement.

I don't read it that way.

Then you're reading it wrong. It is one thing, and one thing only: a requirement that Anrakyr have LoS to the model he's trying to use his ability on. It does absolutely nothing to grant him any LoS he doesn't already have. You can check LoS whenever you like, you don't need permission.

 azazel the cat wrote:
How I would read these rules as a gestalt implies that if you need LOS, then just fething test for LOS.

You seem puzzlingly unaware of how completely that undercuts your own argument. You were arguing that Anrakyr's rule gives him some magical LoS that circumvents the normal rules. Now, you're arguing that you just test for LoS as normal. That's correct: you check for LoS as normal, and Anrakyr doesn't have it.

This delving into RAI I know, but it seems odd that a model becomes blind in a transport unless he pulls a trigger.

I agree that the rule is odd. There's another rule that's odd: You can't draw LoS for shooting to the guys in the Dark Eldar Raider who're firing at you, in plain sight, with not so much as an armor plate between! I'll be more sympathetic to the notion of Anrakyr using MitM out of a CCB when we can just shoot him in the same location.

In the meantime, the RaW is quite clear: no LoS for/to embarked models except when they're shooting. And the rulebook reaffirms this point quite clearly.

rigeld2 wrote:No, really, the the final 5th Ed brb FAQ they said you cannot trace Los for anything but PSAs and shooting. MITM is neither of those.
Since the surrounding rules haven't changed, and that FAQ didn't change a rule, simply clarified, there's no reason to think it does work.

I'm pretty sure we agree with each other about the rule, so i'm just going to bow out of this conversation and let you have at it as you wish?

Pyrian wrote:
In the meantime, the RaW is quite clear: no LoS for/to embarked models except when they're shooting. And the rulebook reaffirms this point quite clearly.

I'd appreciate a citation for that.


And Nos, determining LOS for models obviously passes to the firepoint, or the hull in the event of an open-topped vehicle. So anytime you need LOS, I read those rules as saying "go ahead and check, in this case it's from the hull of the CCB".

Ultimately, this entire debate is going to boil down to this:

"You can't do that, it's a permissive ruleset and you don't have permission" vs. "6th Ed. does not appear to be written with elements of minutae following that code; only larger, full actions appear to do so"

In other words, "you can't test for LOS" doesn't appear to gel with the wording of much of the 6th Ed. book, whereas "you can't just decare ten rounds of shooting" obviously does.

It's not the argument you're expecting, I know. The trouble is, the tired tirade of "it's a permissive ruleset" seems to have unravelled at the microscopic level with regard to many individual steps in 6th Ed.

azazel the cat wrote:And Nos, determining LOS for models obviously passes to the firepoint, or the hull in the event of an open-topped vehicle. So anytime you need LOS, I read those rules as saying "go ahead and check, in this case it's from the hull of the CCB"

You mean the rules that are very specifically titled "Passengers SHOOTING From Open-Topped Transports"? So once again, what gives you permission to use those rules for anything other than shooting? Nothing.

Can you see the Traveler inside the vehicle perch in there. Can he see your vehicle. Then it works. Its a power used in the shooting phase to shoot a vehicles weapons so in my games it works.

Argue all you want grammer and sentence structure and all that crap, hey even throw in the permission non permission argument which has no place in these rules discussions since they are not used by GW. IIRC since I cant see them in the BRB. Page number please? Too much of these rules arguments use terms not in GW descriptions to solidify their hate of a codex.

All you nay sayers will be sadly disapointed when your wrong, if and when it ever get faq'd.

On the contrary, i'd absolutely 'love' it if 'Mind in the Machine' got an update allowing it to be used from a transport as he is my favorite Necron IC, and i always put him in a command barge to boot. Sadly, what i'd want and what the rules say often differs however...

Part of my largest problem with people saying that Anrakyr is not on the board is that in the end there is a representation on the board, the CCB. People want to rules lawyer all kinds of things because things give other players advantage. Common sense tells you that a guy that would clearly be standing on a hovering board in the middle of a field could easily draw LoS. End of discussion. If you want to whine cry and throw a fit that common sense shouldn't be included in the game cause there is no rule for it then I hope your opponent calls you in every game for every minor actual rule. It's a game in the end they have to assume you are playing it to have fun.

How is the power different from a PSA? You need LoS, it happens in the shooting phase.

Open top is just that open. Saying it's a huge port is like saying a field is a room with a really high ceiling and really far away walls.

There is no rule in the book allowing you to roll dice. It says you may be called upon to, be forced to, have to and such but no rule actually allowing you to.

The rule my group finally decided was the final arbitrator on most abilities was on pg 7
"Where advanced rules apply to a specific model, they always override any contradicting basic rules."

So you want it to work "just because" with no rules to back your position. We're talking about a game with rules here. Whatever supposed "real life" arguments you want to make are pointless. This is a game and games have rules and one of those rules is that firing points can only be used for firing ranged weapons and psychic shooting attacks.

 azazel the cat wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:

 Neorealist wrote:
No, not really. In 5th and again in 6th they've more or less left it with the 'It doesn't say you can so you can not' pseudo-rule, with a few specific exceptions scattered here or there.

No, really, the the final 5th Ed brb FAQ they said you cannot trace Los for anything but PSAs and shooting. MITM is neither of those.
Since the surrounding rules haven't changed, and that FAQ didn't change a rule, simply clarified, there's no reason to think it does work.

That's in the 5th Ed. FAQ, yes? As in, the FAQ for the rules set we no longer use? Please stop citing it as a relevant source. It is no longer any more relevant than the 2nd Ed. FAQs or the rules for Dreadfleet.

It'd be great if you'd read the thread for context. Thanks.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 azazel the cat wrote:

Pyrian wrote:LOS for Anrakyr is not a permission, it's a requirement.

I don't read it that way.

So are the LOS and range references requirements or permissions?
Yes, attempt to draw LOS. Oh, you're in a vehicle? Where are you going to draw LOS from? A firing point? You can't, you can only draw LOS for shooting through those.

I read "At the start of your Shooting phase, choose an enemy vehicle within 18" and in Anrakyr's line of sight and roll a D6" to imply that you are meant to draw LOS for this ability and from this ability.

Yes. Now, find permission to draw LOS from a firing point for that ability.

Now, that sounds to me like they're saying that whenever LOS isn't obvious, you should determine it. Combine that with pg. 4 of the BRB, which says "You can always check distance at any time."

How I would read these rules as a gestalt implies that if you need LOS, then just fething test for LOS.

Correct. Now - where's your permission to use a firing point to draw LOS?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Gravmyr wrote:
Part of my largest problem with people saying that Anrakyr is not on the board is that in the end there is a representation on the board, the CCB. People want to rules lawyer all kinds of things because things give other players advantage. Common sense tells you that a guy that would clearly be standing on a hovering board in the middle of a field could easily draw LoS. End of discussion. If you want to whine cry and throw a fit that common sense shouldn't be included in the game cause there is no rule for it then I hope your opponent calls you in every game for every minor actual rule. It's a game in the end they have to assume you are playing it to have fun.

See, many of us enjoy playing by the rules - I'd rather my opponent called me on every minor rule. I welcome it. It's fun.

How is the power different from a PSA? You need LoS, it happens in the shooting phase.

It doesn't use a Warp Charge, it doesn't require a psychic test, there's no chance for Perils, it's not called a PSA anywhere...
How is it different from a bolter? Might as well have asked that question.

Open top is just that open. Saying it's a huge port is like saying a field is a room with a really high ceiling and really far away walls.

What you want to believe and what the rules say are two different things.