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.

No, it is an argument that doesnt talk about the fact there is no conflict for the rule to override.

The rule overrides LOS, but doesnt override Arc.

Debunked. Next argument?

No. You say it is debunked is not the same as debunked. See my previous post. Just because yo do not interpret the rule the same as everyine else does not mean that you are correct.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
And there is conflict - every time that the nearest unit is not in the front arc. It does not give you a get out clause. You are forcednto shoot the nearest unit.

nosferatu1001 wrote:

Peasant wrote:Yes.
Let me clarify.
According to the assumption that the doom wheels lightning is in the front arc..the hurricanum must be front arc also.
I believe this to be incorrect.
The doom wheel is a 360 degree lightning as is the luminark.
Both of their rules state ... with in x"

So found a specific rule overriding the requirement that you fire in front arc?

TanKoL wrote:It's already been debated a lot, so far the results of the debate are:
nosferatu plays it "front arc"
everyone else on the thread playd it "360"

he won't budge whatever you say or offer to argue, so I stopped

Given you failed to provide a single rules quote, or indeed any actual argument based on the rules of the game we play, why would I "budge" given my position does follow the rules of the game?

A lot of people play that cannon can target a point anywhere on the table, disregarding true LOS. Doesnt mean they are right by the rules.

You can play a houserule all you like. It would behoove you, however, to realise this and ensure people are happy with your houserule before playing. Assuming otherwise is an unsafe position.

Oh, and you make a critical failure in arguments - you assume I play any way or the other. Dont. Thanks!

Where does doom wheel state front arc.? All it states is nearest target within 18"
If you play the doom wheel in front arc..which I, amongst many do not, then you should be playing the Aura of hysh, portents of battle, and all other similar effects that state all models within x" in front arc.
Do you play your generals inspiring presence only in front arc..? It says any model within12"
Where does it state front arc for the doom wheel or any other of these special rules?
If most people are playing it 360, you are the one with the house rule.

Doomwheel says withing x(18) inches.

Shooting is restricted to front arc.

Within x inches is not allowing shooting outside of frotal arc without the allowance to ignore printed rules.

Implications notwithstanding, there is nothing stated that ignores the limitation of frontal arc being needed for shooting, as it is a requirement for shooting in general.

"Shoot at Z" does not prevent something from saying you need to "shoot at X first".

Niteware wrote:No. You say it is debunked is not the same as debunked. See my previous post. Just because yo do not interpret the rule the same as everyine else does not mean that you are correct.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
And there is conflict - every time that the nearest unit is not in the front arc. It does not give you a get out clause. You are forcednto shoot the nearest unit.

Ah, I see you just dont understand specific > general then.

That explains it.

It is debunked, as you have a specific RESTRICTION stating you may only fire in front arc, and you have no SPECIFIC permission to fire outside of your front arc. To give you an analogy that is round base world, but is in the same permissive game system - being able to assault after disembarking from a vehicle does not allow you to assault after arriving from Reserves, as there is a specific restriction that your permission has not overridden

Here you have a specific restriction that is not overridden by a specific permission. Unless you can find said permission? Page and graph will suffice.

Peasant wrote:
Where does doom wheel state front arc.? All it states is nearest target within 18"

Shooting rules

Peasant wrote:If you play the doom wheel in front arc..which I, amongst many do not, then you should be playing the Aura of hysh, portents of battle, and all other similar effects that state all models within x" in front arc.

Read their individual rules, are they Shooting attacks? No? Then perhaps you could not compare apples to oranges? If you think they are applicable, then explain how, including ALL rules.

Stating "this aura affect only operates in front arc" does not mean the same thing as "all aura affects only operate in the front arc". Hopefully you can understand the difference.

Peasant wrote:Do you play your generals inspiring presence only in front arc..? It says any model within12"

Sigh. See above. Is it a shooting attack? No? Shucks, then I guess the specific SHOOTING restriction doesnt apply! Who would have thought that two entirely different things operate differently

Peasant wrote:Where does it state front arc for the doom wheel or any other of these special rules?

Did you bother reading this thread? Or indeed my responses? Have you read the basic shooting rules in this 8th edition of WHFB, whihc require shooting attacks to be made within front arc AND within LOS? Have you found anything in the Skaven Doomwheel rules which states it ignores BOTH the LOS and front arc restriction?

In fact, are you able to provide any actual rules to back up your argument? Page and graph, or concede. Now.

Peasant wrote:If most people are playing it 360, you are the one with the house rule.

Crap. Did you read, at all, the comment about cannon? They have a VERY straightforward rule - the point nominated initially MUST be in LOS of the Cannon. MOST people dont bother playing that, as apparently getting down and seeing what your models can see is actually anathema for a lot of WHFB players. Doesnt make it a "hosue rule"

Same here. De jure is not the same as de facto.

So, for the final time - post a page and grapgh showing your exemption from the requirement to shoot in front arc ONLY. If you continue to post assertions with no backing, or further strawmen, you will be considered to have accepted you are now discussing a pure hpouserule you wish to play, not one based on the WHFB rules.

Page 87, unique units.
They may use some of the normal rules for other units, but they may have rules totally unique to themselves.
Doom wheel clearly has several unique rules.
The fact that it says that it targets "the nearest unit" is suggestive that this could be another.
Due to its unique nature, it is hard to assume which other rules apply.

Going back to general vs specific, rules which affect only one model are specific. Rules which affect everything that has normal shooting rules are general. Again, Nosferatu, it is clearly you that does not understand the difference.

If you want to argue that this is not a unique rule, what evidence do you have?

sigh.

No, you dont get it. There is no specific override of the general shooting requirement. If there was, you would have posted it.

Until you can post that the DW has an exemption to this rule, it must abide by it. Simple.

Did you understand the simple example I gave of how specific > general works>

nosferatu1001 wrote:

Niteware wrote:No. You say it is debunked is not the same as debunked. See my previous post. Just because yo do not interpret the rule the same as everyine else does not mean that you are correct.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
And there is conflict - every time that the nearest unit is not in the front arc. It does not give you a get out clause. You are forcednto shoot the nearest unit.

Ah, I see you just dont understand specific > general then.

That explains it.

It is debunked, as you have a specific RESTRICTION stating you may only fire in front arc, and you have no SPECIFIC permission to fire outside of your front arc. To give you an analogy that is round base world, but is in the same permissive game system - being able to assault after disembarking from a vehicle does not allow you to assault after arriving from Reserves, as there is a specific restriction that your permission has not overridden

Here you have a specific restriction that is not overridden by a specific permission. Unless you can find said permission? Page and graph will suffice.

Peasant wrote:
Where does doom wheel state front arc.? All it states is nearest target within 18"

Shooting rules

Peasant wrote:If you play the doom wheel in front arc..which I, amongst many do not, then you should be playing the Aura of hysh, portents of battle, and all other similar effects that state all models within x" in front arc.

Read their individual rules, are they Shooting attacks? No? Then perhaps you could not compare apples to oranges? If you think they are applicable, then explain how, including ALL rules.

Stating "this aura affect only operates in front arc" does not mean the same thing as "all aura affects only operate in the front arc". Hopefully you can understand the difference.

Peasant wrote:Do you play your generals inspiring presence only in front arc..? It says any model within12"

Sigh. See above. Is it a shooting attack? No? Shucks, then I guess the specific SHOOTING restriction doesnt apply! Who would have thought that two entirely different things operate differently

Peasant wrote:Where does it state front arc for the doom wheel or any other of these special rules?

Did you bother reading this thread? Or indeed my responses? Have you read the basic shooting rules in this 8th edition of WHFB, whihc require shooting attacks to be made within front arc AND within LOS? Have you found anything in the Skaven Doomwheel rules which states it ignores BOTH the LOS and front arc restriction?

In fact, are you able to provide any actual rules to back up your argument? Page and graph, or concede. Now.

Peasant wrote:If most people are playing it 360, you are the one with the house rule.

Crap. Did you read, at all, the comment about cannon? They have a VERY straightforward rule - the point nominated initially MUST be in LOS of the Cannon. MOST people dont bother playing that, as apparently getting down and seeing what your models can see is actually anathema for a lot of WHFB players. Doesnt make it a "hosue rule"

Same here. De jure is not the same as de facto.

So, for the final time - post a page and grapgh showing your exemption from the requirement to shoot in front arc ONLY. If you continue to post assertions with no backing, or further strawmen, you will be considered to have accepted you are now discussing a pure hpouserule you wish to play, not one based on the WHFB rules.

Keep your snide, pathetic Internet high horse commentary out of the discussion.
40k comments are irrelevant also.
We have rules from a previous edition with a model that breaks all other shooting rules. All of its shooting rules are specific LOS, choosing a target, shooting into combat, target selection, rolling to hit, strength etc. It is reasonable that it breaks front arc rules also and to this point is an oversight.
The doomwheel makes no reference to it being a shooting attack, it is in fact specifically called a zzzap attack. it just happens in the phase.
It is never referred to as shooting
There is no specific description given for the doomwheel.
I have not found any proving it doesnt use its front arc nor have you found anything proving it does. You assume just as we do.
If/when GW FAQ's this we will have their answer.
The fact that we are having this discussion about the doomwheel shows that the actual usage is questionable. And if a majority play a questionable rule one way, it again is reasonable that that is the correct way.

nosferatu1001 wrote:
sigh.

No, you dont get it. There is no specific override of the general shooting requirement. If there was, you would have posted it.

Until you can post that the DW has an exemption to this rule, it must abide by it. Simple.

Did you understand the simple example I gave of how specific > general works>

Of course, although you were utterly mistaken in your use of the words specific and general. As usual.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Peasant wrote:

nosferatu1001 wrote:

Niteware wrote:No. You say it is debunked is not the same as debunked. See my previous post. Just because yo do not interpret the rule the same as everyine else does not mean that you are correct.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
And there is conflict - every time that the nearest unit is not in the front arc. It does not give you a get out clause. You are forcednto shoot the nearest unit.

Ah, I see you just dont understand specific > general then.

That explains it.

It is debunked, as you have a specific RESTRICTION stating you may only fire in front arc, and you have no SPECIFIC permission to fire outside of your front arc. To give you an analogy that is round base world, but is in the same permissive game system - being able to assault after disembarking from a vehicle does not allow you to assault after arriving from Reserves, as there is a specific restriction that your permission has not overridden

Here you have a specific restriction that is not overridden by a specific permission. Unless you can find said permission? Page and graph will suffice.

Peasant wrote:
Where does doom wheel state front arc.? All it states is nearest target within 18"

Shooting rules

Peasant wrote:If you play the doom wheel in front arc..which I, amongst many do not, then you should be playing the Aura of hysh, portents of battle, and all other similar effects that state all models within x" in front arc.

Read their individual rules, are they Shooting attacks? No? Then perhaps you could not compare apples to oranges? If you think they are applicable, then explain how, including ALL rules.

Stating "this aura affect only operates in front arc" does not mean the same thing as "all aura affects only operate in the front arc". Hopefully you can understand the difference.

Peasant wrote:Do you play your generals inspiring presence only in front arc..? It says any model within12"

Sigh. See above. Is it a shooting attack? No? Shucks, then I guess the specific SHOOTING restriction doesnt apply! Who would have thought that two entirely different things operate differently

Peasant wrote:Where does it state front arc for the doom wheel or any other of these special rules?

Did you bother reading this thread? Or indeed my responses? Have you read the basic shooting rules in this 8th edition of WHFB, whihc require shooting attacks to be made within front arc AND within LOS? Have you found anything in the Skaven Doomwheel rules which states it ignores BOTH the LOS and front arc restriction?

In fact, are you able to provide any actual rules to back up your argument? Page and graph, or concede. Now.

Peasant wrote:If most people are playing it 360, you are the one with the house rule.

Crap. Did you read, at all, the comment about cannon? They have a VERY straightforward rule - the point nominated initially MUST be in LOS of the Cannon. MOST people dont bother playing that, as apparently getting down and seeing what your models can see is actually anathema for a lot of WHFB players. Doesnt make it a "hosue rule"

Same here. De jure is not the same as de facto.

So, for the final time - post a page and grapgh showing your exemption from the requirement to shoot in front arc ONLY. If you continue to post assertions with no backing, or further strawmen, you will be considered to have accepted you are now discussing a pure hpouserule you wish to play, not one based on the WHFB rules.

Keep your snide, pathetic Internet high horse commentary out of the discussion.
40k comments are irrelevant also.
We have rules from a previous edition with a model that breaks all other shooting rules. All of its shooting rules are specific LOS, choosing a target, shooting into combat, target selection, rolling to hit, strength etc. It is reasonable that it breaks front arc rules also and to this point is an oversight.
The doomwheel makes no reference to it being a shooting attack, it is in fact specifically called a zzzap attack. it just happens in the phase.
It is never referred to as shooting
There is no specific description given for the doomwheel.
I have not found any proving it doesnt use its front arc nor have you found anything proving it does. You assume just as we do.
If/when GW FAQ's this we will have their answer.
The fact that we are having this discussion about the doomwheel shows that the actual usage is questionable. And if a majority play a questionable rule one way, it again is reasonable that that is the correct way.

This

Niteware wrote:

nosferatu1001 wrote:
sigh.

No, you dont get it. There is no specific override of the general shooting requirement. If there was, you would have posted it.

Until you can post that the DW has an exemption to this rule, it must abide by it. Simple.

Did you understand the simple example I gave of how specific > general works>

Of course, although you were utterly mistaken in your use of the words specific and general. As usual.

So you will add anything more to the discussion?

I assume, given you now understand specific vs general, that you are conceding you do not havea rules based argument.

peasant wrote:Keep your snide, pathetic Internet high horse commentary out of the discussion.

Reported. I asked you to provide rules - you did not do so. Argue the post, not the poster.

peasant wrote:40k comments are irrelevant also.

When theyre an easy example of specific vs general, which WHFB is based on, they are NOT irrelevant. Trying to teach you how the game rules are constructed, which is true for both 40k and WHFB, and used a pertinent example.

peasant wrote:We have rules from a previous edition with a model that breaks all other shooting rules. All of its shooting rules are specific LOS, choosing a target, shooting into combat, target selection, rolling to hit, strength etc. It is reasonable that it breaks front arc rules also and to this point is an oversight.

Ah, so you are arguing INTENT? As in, HYWPI? Sorry, I thought you were arguing rules in this rules forum. I was unaware, as you had failed to mark your post as such, that you were arguing a houserule.

peasant wrote:The doomwheel makes no reference to it being a shooting attack, it is in fact specifically called a zzzap attack. it just happens in the phase.
It is never referred to as shooting
There is no specific description given for the doomwheel.
I have not found any proving it doesnt use its front arc nor have you found anything proving it does. You assume just as we do.
If/when GW FAQ's this we will have their answer.
The fact that we are having this discussion about the doomwheel shows that the actual usage is questionable. And if a majority play a questionable rule one way, it again is reasonable that that is the correct way.

Again, de facto is not de jure. A lot of people play cannon being able to shoot an initial point the cannon cannot see. Does that mean that is the "correct" way? Or does it just mean that people get used to how one edition plays and dont make changes when the new one appears?

8th edition added in a NEW shooting requirement - that you must have LOS AND be in your front arc. This 7th edition book, where the two concepts were one (LOS was, broadly, anything in your front arc that wasnt in terrain) could not know about this change, and does not have a specific exemption to the general shooting requirement. They have not bothered to FAQ it, which highly implies it will not change

The same thing happened in round base land between 4th and 5th, with dreadnoughts changing from 180degree fire arc to 45 degree. That change suprirsed a lot of people who dont read the rules that carefully - same as in this case.

Nosferatu, you're not answering in any way to his (relevant) comment on how the Doomwheel is not doing a shooting attack, but simply triggers a lightning-based ability that happens to be resolved during the shooting phase

So until you yaddda yadda rant rant quote quote *add incoherent useless text here*, you are "debunked" (as you love to put it)

TanKoL wrote:
Nosferatu, you're not answering in any way to his (relevant) comment on how the Doomwheel is not doing a shooting attack, but simply triggers a lightning-based ability that happens to be resolved during the shooting phase

So until you yaddda yadda rant rant quote quote *add incoherent useless text here*, you are "debunked" (as you love to put it)

Can you provide another attack that happens inside the shooting phase that is not a "shooting" attack or a quote from the rules statin it is not a shooting attack?

I don't know of any "attacks" done in the shooting phase that is not a "shooting attack".

Not exactly the shooting Phase, but the Bell another Unique Model activates in Magic Phase, Is not a Magical Item, Has only one affect that is the same as casting the Spell, These affects do not use winds of magic dice, cannot be dispelled so they could fall under the same outside the normal rules as the Doomwheel's Zzzappp Attack in the shooting phase. Ring the Bell at the start of the Magic phase apply XYZ Result. The Skaven Have many things that are outside the scope of 8th ed. Which is the reason thier FAQ could be a rule book. But putting this one into either is really hard, I can understand how it can go both ways, If it is truly a shooting attack, Then it should probably be the front ark, If it is some other type of Attack, (as alot of Skaven stuff is) then it would be 360. Personally as many others believe, The wording in the Army Book implies, that it is indeed "360". We in our clubs have gone Back and forth, and until GW comes out and says one way or the Other, we will continue to use it as 360.

Arc of sight IS Line of Sight in fantasy. It governs shooting, Magic Missiles, Direct Damage, and Charging. In as far as I know, the Doom Wheel's rules state that it ignores Line of Sight restrictions and affects the nearest unit in the shooting phase, which would suggest to me that it ignores the arc restrictions and that's how everywhere I have been has played it, from coast to coast on the US GT scene. That is, unless you want to argue that things like the Mortis Engine only damage units in their front arc or other similar silliness....

Are scream attacks shooting attacks?

Anvil of Doom?

Nosferatu...
I am discussing rules. most times if it is in 'you make da call'. It is 'how I would play it.' That is how it ends up here.
So you have your position and so do I.
You have a rules based assumption, so do I.
The difference is you have one rule that you claim applies and I have seven reasons why it doesn't.
Do you have anything else to defend your position?
Generally shooting follows shooting rules.
The doomwheel specifically breaks shooting rules with the zzaap attack.
You play it forward arc, I play it 360.
I guess we are done here.

 Phazael wrote:
Arc of sight IS Line of Sight in fantasy.

Interesting.

But this does not seem to be the case.

Page 10 allows for a much greater idea of what a model can see than the shooting rules allow for its targeting though.

 Phazael wrote:
Arc of sight IS Line of Sight in fantasy. It governs shooting, Magic Missiles, Direct Damage, and Charging. In as far as I know, the Doom Wheel's rules state that it ignores Line of Sight restrictions and affects the nearest unit in the shooting phase, which would suggest to me that it ignores the arc restrictions and that's how everywhere I have been has played it, from coast to coast on the US GT scene. That is, unless you want to argue that things like the Mortis Engine only damage units in their front arc or other similar silliness....

Please review your 8th edition rulebook, and note that this is no longer true. Arc of sight WAS also line of sight, that is NO LONGER TRUE.

Peasant - so it is a shooting attack that isnt a shooting attack?

You are told to ignore LOS. Does that give you permission to ignore Arc of Sight? Please find a rule showing this.

nosferatu1001 wrote:

 Phazael wrote:
Arc of sight IS Line of Sight in fantasy. It governs shooting, Magic Missiles, Direct Damage, and Charging. In as far as I know, the Doom Wheel's rules state that it ignores Line of Sight restrictions and affects the nearest unit in the shooting phase, which would suggest to me that it ignores the arc restrictions and that's how everywhere I have been has played it, from coast to coast on the US GT scene. That is, unless you want to argue that things like the Mortis Engine only damage units in their front arc or other similar silliness....

Please review your 8th edition rulebook, and note that this is no longer true. Arc of sight WAS also line of sight, that is NO LONGER TRUE.

Peasant - so it is a shooting attack that isnt a shooting attack?

You are told to ignore LOS. Does that give you permission to ignore Arc of Sight? Please find a rule showing this.

No. It is not a shooting attack. It is a damage effect that targets the nearest model within 18" in the shooting phase.

Phazel made the comment about the Mortis Engine and it's damage. What kind of attack is that? Does it do damage? Is it front arc?

BRB says you can only shoot at targets that are in your LOS, You can only draw LOS in your AOS, If you do not need LOS, Then you can not apply AOS as it has become a non standard attack within the shooting phase. Army book always takes president over BRB, And army book clearly states the nearest model.

"precedent"

Specific vs general. You need a specific rule to override the requirement to have LOS AND be in your front arc.

You have a specific rule overriding the requirement to have LOS. You do not have any such rule overriding the requirement for being in your front arc.

cawizkid wrote:
BRB says you can only shoot at targets that are in your LOS

That is not the only restriction.

Glad to see my question is generating discussion it is to bad gw wont faq it. Is there a way to email gw ? Will they answer rules questions? my local gw store says its 360

You can email them, they wont reply but it may get into an FAQ eventually(good luck with it being in your lifetime). GW stores are notorious for getting the rules 100% wrong.

The email address is either:
askyourquestion@games-workshop.com

or

Gamefaqs@gwplc.com


not sure what is the current one.

warhammernut wrote:
Glad to see my question is generating discussion it is to bad gw wont faq it. Is there a way to email gw ? Will they answer rules questions? my local gw store says its 360

I think there is a majority that play 360. As you can read through the posts that seems to be the trend as well.
Like anything else if that's how you play and everyone is on board with it then it's good game times.
I'd give my 360 vote as well.

Yep, and as pointed out de facto is not the same as de jure.

Same as the majority (in the UK) play cannon incorrectly.

nosferatu1001 wrote:
Yep, and as pointed out de facto is not the same as de jure.

Same as the majority (in the UK) play cannon incorrectly.

So the mortis engine only damages in its front arc as well? You avoided that question.

You can say de facto vs. de jure all you want but the fact that we are having this discussion shows the statement is as useful as 'I'm right, you're wrong, so there.'

The cannon is a different issue.

No, I just got tired of the repetition. Theres a difference.

No, the cannon is a precise example of defacto vs dejure. The rules are blindingly obvious, but a lot of people unknowingly / deliberately play differently.

nosferatu1001 wrote:
No, I just got tired of the repetition. Theres a difference.

No, the cannon is a precise example of defacto vs dejure. The rules are blindingly obvious, but a lot of people unknowingly / deliberately play differently.

But we are not talking about the cannon. It has its own rules and is a different subject. And has no relevance to this discussion.

We are talking about how the damage is dealt from the doomwheel.

What repetition? You never gave input about it.
The Mortis engine does damage within x"'s. So is it front arc like the doomwheel?
I'd say it's 360....just like the doomwheel.

nosferatu1001 wrote:
sigh.

Exasperated, so soon? :-) Don't worry, all the yourenotgettingitblahblahs soon become white noise when you become more familiar with the internet.

-------

It is pretty obvious that the DW can shoot everywhere it likes. Closest target within x is a replacement for the normal rules.

Rage on.