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.
The word Weapon has been used far to often in conjunction with 'Shoot' or 'Fire,' and with far to many different outcomes as to how we resolve it, to reach to the conclusion that this specific instance is resolved differently. No... not only does it grant permission to resolve differently by that interpretation, it also does so without specifically mentioning that it is resolved differently. That is the problem with the Rule at it's core: It does not tell us to resolve the attacks differently, it only implies it through common sense, so we do not have permission to Resolve the rule differently... but that isn't why I am posting, I am more concerned about the accusations you continue to throw against posters in this forum.
Please stop implying the only reason to ever debate a Rule is to exploit it! The primary reason to debate this Rule has always been to better understand the Rule, identify flaws in our logic or spots where we have applied the Rule incorrectly due to mis-reading or mis-remembering what was written. That is the point of this whole forum and the only reason posters like me continue to come back to it... we have no invested interest past the painful sensations that come from trying to understand Game Workshop Rules. The vast majority of the posters here will honestly and openly debate anything, even arguments over the meaning of individual words will occur within this site, simply for the sake of the debate itself. While I wouldn't normally speak on the behalf of other posters, I can think of easily two dozen names that fall into the same category of arguing Rules for the sake of Arguing Rules.
Simply put, we are just argumentative ***** and have chosen Warhammer 40k to argue over instead of the Bible or many other poorly written systems that normally serve this purpose.
This message was edited 3 times. Last update was at 2014/12/19 19:43:12
8th made it so I can no longer sway Tau onto the side of Chaos, but they will eventually turn aside from their idea of the Greater Good to embrace the Greatest of pleasures.
Simply put, we are just argumentative ***** and have chosen Warhammer 40k to argue over instead of the Bible or many other poorly written systems that normally serve this purpose.
Well, sorry if it came off as such, but I don't think the people debating the rules are all looking for perceived advantages. Rather, I think that the initial questioning of rules always comes from this at the initial level, before it ever reaches the people who enjoy discussing the nuances of the rules and sorting them out.
To cite an example, when the Storm Shield first came out forums had numerous discussions of possible reasons that it must be wrong, some people even tried to reason that it MUST be a typo because the Terminators didn't even cost a different amount at the time. I just have seen it so many times with rules that HAVE been clear, that it's now my default assumption as a point of origin, even if the rules legitimately aren't (which I freely admit is true in this case. There are a million better ways to have worded it... "Each weapon fires independently at the target closest to its' barrel" BAM done. That is part of what makes these so frustrating...).
Fenris Frost wrote: That is probably because they read these rules and didn't micro-analyze them to death first and just played the game how it made the most sense instead of being ridiculously literal about it.
Listen, no one in this thread has had any answer at all for the following glaring fact:
If you apply the rules as standard, sans Designer's Note-style liberal interpretation, the thing always shoots all of its' weapons at the single target nearest to it. There is literally no possible way it wouldn't do this, because the target would always be "the nearest target in range and line of sight."
So...
...why give it a rule telling us it targets multiple sources, if the very same rule ensures it never will be able to in literally no situation?
Except I encounter that problem a lot of having 2 or more units at an equi-distants from a firing unit. Fail IB:Hunt enough and you realize how often this can actually happen in game.
Fenris Frost wrote:People are salivating for 5 free blasts on a target and aren't seeing past that. They will hate it when I drive a vehicle up to the thing and it does nothing every turn. I'm sure the first time I do that to a guy at the table he is gonna whip out the rule, re-read it, and reinterpret it.
People always cling to easter eggs.
This ONE time people want to ignore it to keep their pods super because Nid players think their army is weak.
Fenris Frost wrote: (if you are not skimming books looking for reasons to make sure the back two large blasts can hit the same stuff your front three can and that and I maintain that is the only reason this is a debate at all).
Fenris Frost wrote:Well, sorry if it came off as such, but I don't think the people debating the rules are all looking for perceived advantages.
Really? Your approach to this debate says otherwise.
;quote] Rather, I think that the initial questioning of rules always comes from this at the initial level, before it ever reaches the people who enjoy discussing the nuances of the rules and sorting them out.
Yeah, it can't be because the wording of the rule as printed doesn't make sense given the rest of the rules in existence.
To cite an example, when the Storm Shield first came out forums had numerous discussions of possible reasons that it must be wrong, some people even tried to reason that it MUST be a typo because the Terminators didn't even cost a different amount at the time. I just have seen it so many times with rules that HAVE been clear, that it's now my default assumption as a point of origin, even if the rules legitimately aren't (which I freely admit is true in this case. There are a million better ways to have worded it... "Each weapon fires independently at the target closest to its' barrel" BAM done. That is part of what makes these so frustrating...).
Please, could you show me a copy of the Designer's Note? The only copy of the rules I have doesn't have one. And your wording is still confusing, but it is better and gets the designer's note intent across.
The main problem I have with your argument is it (literally) forces people to play two different ways and will (not might) cause an argument at tables around the world. How? Because the only people who have access to the Designer's Note are people who bought the White Dwarf. People who use the freely downloaded rules have no idea any Designer's Note actually exists.
My beautiful wife wrote:Trucks = Carnifex snack, Tanks = meals.
the wording still says: fire each weapon at nearest target. the wording explicitly talks about the weapon and not the model, thous overrides the rulebook's rules for MC's.
it doesnt say fire all weapons at the nearest target, it doesnt say the model fires. it sepcifically mentions EACH WEAPON.
The main problem I have with your argument is it (literally) forces people to play two different ways and will (not might) cause an argument at tables around the world. How? Because the only people who have access to the Designer's Note are people who bought the White Dwarf. People who use the freely downloaded rules have no idea any Designer's Note actually exists.
no it doesnt. its a point to FURTHER reinforce the rule. RAI is pretty clear in this one. there is NO DEBATE over RAI. as far as RaW goes, i can understand the confusion, still the first time i read the rule, without knowledge of the designers words, i still read it in the way that each weapon fires at the nearest target, why? because the rule says: each weapon fires at the nearest target. again. not the model does, the weapon does.
btw... try fielding a looted wagon. guess what? its a white dwarf exclusive, but still a normal model even IF it rules can only be obtained (well, legally -.-) by owning a white dwarf.
but anyway. i cant really stress this point enough... the rule ACTUALLY talks about EACH WEAPON firing at the nearest target.
and yes, i played tyranids more than only once and played countless time against them througth the last 5 editions... the probabiltiy for multiple units beeing in the same range is pretty non existant. and not nearly as common as to justify a special rule to compensate for this remote possibility.
This message was edited 5 times. Last update was at 2014/12/22 14:58:46
RedNoak wrote: the wording still says: fire each weapon at nearest target. the wording explicitly talks about the weapon and not the model, thous overrides the rulebook's rules for MC's.
it doesnt say fire all weapons at the nearest target, it doesnt say the model fires. it sepcifically mentions EACH WEAPON.
So you;re just going to ignore the rest of the thread that has pointed out how weapon and model are used interchangeably in the rules? Awesome.
The main problem I have with your argument is it (literally) forces people to play two different ways and will (not might) cause an argument at tables around the world. How? Because the only people who have access to the Designer's Note are people who bought the White Dwarf. People who use the freely downloaded rules have no idea any Designer's Note actually exists.
no it doesnt. its a point to FURTHER reinforce the rule. RAI is pretty clear in this one. there is NO DEBATE over RAI. as far as RaW goes, i can understand the confusion, still the first time i read the rule, without knowledge of the designers words, i still read it in the way that each weapon fires at the nearest target, why? because the rule says: each weapon fires at the nearest target. again. not the model does, the weapon does.
Please, show me rules on measuring range and LoS from a weapon that isn't on a vehicle. I'll wait.
And there is debate over RAI - the "designer" in the White Dwarf might not actually have been the designer of the unit based on how the rule conflicts with the base rulebook rules.
btw... try fielding a looted wagon. guess what? its a white dwarf exclusive, but still a normal model even IF it rules can only be obtained (well, legally -.-) by owning a white dwarf.
Relevance? There's more than one way to field the Tyrannocyte, but only one which gets you a copy of the Designer's Note.
but anyway. i cant really stress this point enough... the rule ACTUALLY talks about EACH WEAPON firing at the nearest target.
Great. Now how does that work? The pod isn't a vehicle - you understand that, right? So what rules do we use?
and yes, i played tyranids more than only once and played countless time against them througth the last 5 editions... the probabiltiy for multiple units beeing in the same range is pretty non existant. and not nearly as common as to justify a special rule to compensate for this remote possibility.
Except it can happen, and does quite often. Not that it's relevant at all.
My beautiful wife wrote:Trucks = Carnifex snack, Tanks = meals.
Tyrannocyte=MC MC measures Shooting Phase from model base. Tyrannocyte fires all 5 Guns at closest target, measured from the Base.
HIWPI though, completely different matter... Tyrannocyte with Vehicle Turrets would be the best.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2014/12/22 15:39:59
DA:80-S+G+M+B++I-Pw40k01++D+++A+++WD100R++T(T)DM+
Roronoa Zoro wrote:When the world shoves you around, you just gotta stand up and shove back. It's not like somebody's gonna save you if you start babbling excuses. - Bring on the hardship. It's preferred in a path of carnage.
Manchu wrote:
It's like you take a Space Marine and say "what could make him cooler?" Instead of adding more super-genetic-psycho-organic modification, you take it all away. You have a regular human left in power armor and all the armies of hell at the gates. And she doesn't even flinch. Pure. Badass.
please stop using excessive quotes broken up by your own comments, it make it hard to read and even harder to edit a reply =)
ok, so first off i added the thing about the looted wagon because someone specifically asked about rules beeing avaible exclusivly to white dwarf owners.
and for the beeing in the same range argument: i dont know how you play it, but unless you only measure in whole inches, there are nearly an infinitive number of steps between an inch and another... even if you only use 1mm (normally beeing the smallest unit of measurement on a ruler) there are 25 steps between em, before two units can be announced as beeing in the same range.
seconldy, about the ambiguity of the word weapon, i guess you are referring to this post:
I totally understand where you're coming from with subject/verb agreement in the sentence, but they do that stuff a lot. Check out the wording on the 'check range' rule:
"Check Range All weapons have a maximum range, which is the furthest distance they can shoot. A weapon must be in range of the target unit to shoot. Here are examples of weapon ranges: Weapon - Maximum Range Laspistol - 12" Boltgun - 24" Autocannon - 48" When checking range, simply measure from each firer to the nearest visible model in the target unit. Any weapon that is found to be out of range of all visible enemy models in the target unit cannot shoot."
well i dont know if you reading the same as i do, but here it clearly states "simply measure from each firer to the nearest visible model in the target unit"
yes, it talks about ranges of weapons, which they normally have btw... and when it specifies how to shoot with em it talks about the firing model, i.e.: the "firer".
so yes it does mention that you measure from the model, and doesnt use the term weapon as a synomym for the model firing.
however in the insticive fire rule it is stated: Each weapon on this model automatically fires at the nearest enemy unit within range and line of sight.
i for my part, can see the difference in the wording. do you? and if not, why?
RedNoak wrote: please stop using excessive quotes broken up by your own comments, it make it hard to read and even harder to edit a reply =)
Its easier to respond directly to your comments than to try and throw paragraphs at each other.
ok, so first off i added the thing about the looted wagon because someone specifically asked about rules beeing avaible exclusivly to white dwarf owners.
The rules aren't exclusive to WD owners. Only the designer's note is.
and for the beeing in the same range: i dont know how you play it, but unless you only measure in whole inches, there are nearly an infinitive number of steps between an inch and another... even if you only use 1mm (normally beeing the smallest unit of measurement on a ruler) there are 25 steps between em, before two units can be announced as beeing in the same range.
I often have multiple units at the same range. And that's without trying. Again, however, it's irrelevant.
seconldy, about the ambiguity of the word weapon, i guess you are referring to this post:
Spoiler:
I totally understand where you're coming from with subject/verb agreement in the sentence, but they do that stuff a lot. Check out the wording on the 'check range' rule:
"Check Range
All weapons have a maximum range, which is the furthest distance they can shoot. A weapon
must be in range of the target unit to shoot. Here are examples of weapon ranges:
Weapon - Maximum Range
Laspistol - 12"
Boltgun - 24"
Autocannon - 48"
When checking range, simply measure from each firer to the nearest visible model in the
target unit. Any weapon that is found to be out of range of all visible enemy models in the
target unit cannot shoot."
well i dont know if you reading the same as i do, but here it clearly states
"simply measure from each firer to the nearest visible model in the
target unit"
yes, it talks about ranges of weapons, which they normally have btw... and when it specifies how to shoot with em it talks about the firing model, i.e.: the "firer".
so yes it does mention that you measure from the model, and doesnt use the term weapon as a synomym for the model firing.
It does in that the weapon and firer are the same point to measure from. Nothing in the Instinctive Fire rule changes that at all.
So how do we measure ranges for weapons for non-vehicle units? Not from the weapon, but from the firer.
however in the insticive fire rule it is stated:
Each weapon on this model automatically fires at the nearest enemy unit within range and line of sight.
i for my part, cann see the difference in the wording. do you? and if not, why?
How do you measure range for weapons? How do you check line of sight for weapons? The only rules we have for either on non-vehicle units are from the firer. You're making up rules to suit the Designer's Note and asserting that the Note doesn't matter and the current rules cover it.
Demonstrably wrong.
because the insictive firing rule specifically says each weapon fires, not the model.
Which doesn't work with the rest of the rules as they actually exist. Unless you'd like to cite some evidence? That'd be great.
My beautiful wife wrote:Trucks = Carnifex snack, Tanks = meals.
It does in that the weapon and firer are the same point to measure from.
exactly, in the rulebook weapons fired (by models which dont have the vehicle type) use the model as its point of measurement. this is how its described in the "checkin range" quote taken from the rulebook.
Which [measuring form the weapon itself] doesn't work with the rest of the rules as they actually exist. Unless you'd like to cite some evidence? That'd be great.
exactly, and thats why we have "special rules" (like the rule instinctive fire) which tells us how to do stuff which is different from the normal rules. thats why the wording says: Each weapon on this model automatically fires at the nearest enemy unit within range and line of sight. to cleary state that normal firing rules are beeing overwritten at this very moment.
if its supposed to act like you interpret it, the sentence is obsolete. a simply: can fire all of it's weapons at the and of the shooting face, ...would have sufficed. but this last part is RAI, so to stay with RaW: the sentence still says each weapon fires at the nearest target. again. not the model, the weapon.
It does in that the weapon and firer are the same point to measure from. Nothing in the Instinctive Fire rule changes that at all.
yes it does. it clearly says each weapon fires, where the rulebook says each firer does.
unless you still cling to the notion that the terms weapon and model are interchangeable, this is cleary a difference.
weapon =/= firer
therefore you measure from the weapon not the model.
This message was edited 3 times. Last update was at 2014/12/22 16:33:25
It does in that the weapon and firer are the same point to measure from.
exactly, in the rulebook weapons fired (by models which dont have the vehicle type) use the model as its point of measurement. this is how its described in the "checkin range" quote taken from the rulebook.
So you agree that all 5 weapons will have the same closest target?
Which [measuring form the weapon itself] doesn't work with the rest of the rules as they actually exist. Unless you'd like to cite some evidence? That'd be great.
exactly, and thats why we have "special rules" (like the rule instinctive fire) which tells us how to do stuff which is different from the normal rules. thats why the wording says:
Each weapon on this model automatically fires at the nearest enemy unit within range and line of sight. to cleary state that normal firing rules are beeing overwritten at this very moment.
It's not "clearly stated". Using all provided rules there's only one way to measure range for weapons fired by models without the vehicle type.
And Instinctive Fire doesn't add any rules on how to measure range. Agreed?
if its supposed to act like you interpret it, the sentence is obsolete. a simply: can fire all of it's weapons at the and of the shooting face, ...would have sufficed. but this last part is RAI, so to stay with RaW: the sentence still says each weapon fires at the nearest target. again. not the model, the weapon.
And you've, again, failed to cite evidence allowing you to measure range and LoS from a weapon.
It does in that the weapon and firer are the same point to measure from. Nothing in the Instinctive Fire rule changes that at all.
yes it does. it clearly says each weapon fires, where the rulebook says each firer does.
Let's be real clear because you're actually making up rules here.
Spoiler:
1. Nominate Unit to Shoot. Choose one of your units that is able to shoot but has yet to do so this turn.
2. Choose a Target. The unit can shoot at an enemy unit that it can see.
3. Select a Weapon. Select a weapon the firing unit is equipped with. All models equipped with a weapon with the same name can now shoot that weapon at the target. Every model that wishes to shoot must be within range of at least one visible model in the target unit. Models that cannot see the target, or are not in range, cannot shoot.
4. Roll To Hit. Roll a D6 for each shot fired. A model’s Ballistic Skill determines what it must roll in order to hit the target.
5. Roll To Wound. For each shot that hit, roll again to see if it wounds the target. The result needed is determined by comparing the Strength of the firing weapon with the majority Toughness of the target unit.
6. Allocate Wounds & Remove Casualties. Any Wounds caused by the firing unit must now be allocated, one at a time, to the closest model in the target unit. A model with a Wound allocated to it can take a saving throw (if it has one) to avoid being wounded. If a model is reduced to 0 Wounds, it is removed as a casualty. Wounds are then allocated to the next closest model. Continue to allocate Wounds and take saving throws until all Wounds have been resolved.
7. Select Another Weapon. After resolving all shots from the currently selected weapon, if the firing unit is equipped with differently named weapons that have yet to fire, select another weapon and repeat steps 3 to 6.
Step 1 is handled by Instinctive Fire. Step 2 you're forced to fire at the closest target, so - because of Instinctive Fire it's conflated with Step 3. So let's look at those rules in more detail.
Spoiler:
CHOOSE A TARGET
Once you have chosen the unit that you want to shoot with, choose a single enemy unit for them to shoot at. To do so, you must check the range and line of sight from your unit to the enemy unit you are targeting. Note that you may check the range and line of sight to multiple enemy units before deciding which one to shoot at and declaring it to your opponent. You cannot target a unit that is locked in combat.
Line of Sight
To target an enemy unit, at least one model must have line of sight to at least one model in the target unit. If no model has line of sight, then a different target must be chosen.
Nothing in IF tells me to check LoS from the weapon, so we use the rules from the rulebook. This uses the model to determine LoS.
Spoiler:
SELECT A WEAPON
Whilst some units are comprised entirely of models with the same weaponry, many units are equipped with a variety of different weapons or contain models that are themselves equipped with more than one gun. When firing with a unit, completely resolve all attacks from the same weapons at the same time before moving onto any differently named weapons (see Select Another Weapon, below).
First, select a weapon that one or more models in your unit are equipped with. <snip>
All weapons have a maximum range, which is the furthest distance they can shoot. A weapon must be in range of the target unit to shoot. Here are examples of weapon ranges:
Weapon - Maximum Range
Laspistol - 12"
Boltgun - 24"
Autocannon - 48"
When checking range, simply measure from each firer to the nearest visible model in the target unit. Any weapon that is found to be out of range of all visible enemy models in the target unit cannot shoot.
Which Models Can Fire?
Any model that has line of sight to at least one enemy model in the target unit and is found to be in range of that model can shoot.
All models in the unit must shoot at the same target unit. If a model cannot shoot at the same target as the other models in its unit then it cannot shoot at all in that phase.
Typically, a model can only fire a single shooting weapon in the same phase, although some models, such as vehicles or monstrous creatures, can shoot two or more. Once a model has fired its maximum number of weapons, it cannot fire again that phase.
So we know the weapon has a maximum range. We have rules on how to measure.
Please quote and underline the rules on measuring range from a weapon (the base of the weapon? The end of the barrel?) that is on a non-vehicle unit. They aren't in the Instinctive Fire rule, so don't bother posting that.
therefore you measure from the weapon not the model.
You are literally making up rules and asserting them as RAW. Please stop doing so.
My beautiful wife wrote:Trucks = Carnifex snack, Tanks = meals.
therefore you measure from the weapon not the model.
You are literally making up rules and asserting them as RAW. Please stop doing so.
i am not making up rules. the instictive fire tule states:
Each weapon on this model automatically fires at the nearest enemy unit within range and line of sight.
the subject of that sentence is the weapon. therefore the range and line of sight is applied to the weapon. not the model.
you fail to deny me that interpration. please tell me how this is making up rules.
anyway, this argument is going in cycles. so i will try to make myself clear one last time.
1. like i said, the rule explicitly mentions the weapon beeing used as a point of reference for range and LoS, due to the fact that the rule states each weapon fires at the nearest, visible unit.
2. since weapons =/= model, you measure from the weapon not the model because the rule says EACH WEAPON.
3. this is a special rule, so it overrides any generic rule found in the rulebook.
in the rulebook its worded that you measure from the "model". in this case however the special rule overrides that notion by saying that each weapon fires at the nearest target.
4. to further implicate the importance of specific terms (which is a great deal when dealing with rules in a 100% RaW way)
look at the table you posted. i will mark every instance the word model is used as a reference to where you measure/shoot from, when making a ranged shooting attack.
not once is the term weapon used when its determined from where you measure the range and LoS from.
and not once is the term weapon used in an interchangable way for the term model.
in the special rule for the tyrannocite however it does use the term weapon. and therefore you should measure from the weapon, not the model.
Spoiler:
1. Nominate Unit to Shoot. Choose one of your units that is able to shoot but has yet to do so this turn.
2. Choose a Target. The unit can shoot at an enemy unit that it can see.
3. Select a Weapon. Select a weapon the firing unit is equipped with.All models equipped with a weapon with the same name can now shoot that weapon at the target. Every modelthat wishes to shoot must be within range of at least one visible model in the target unit. Models that cannot see the target, or are not in range, cannot shoot.
4. Roll To Hit. Roll a D6 for each shot fired. A model’s Ballistic Skill determines what it must roll in order to hit the target.
5. Roll To Wound. For each shot that hit, roll again to see if it wounds the target. The result needed is determined by comparing the Strength of the firing weapon with the majority Toughness of the target unit.
6. Allocate Wounds & Remove Casualties. Any Wounds caused by the firing unit must now be allocated, one at a time, to the closest model in the target unit. A model with a Wound allocated to it can take a saving throw (if it has one) to avoid being wounded. If a model is reduced to 0 Wounds, it is removed as a casualty. Wounds are then allocated to the next closest model. Continue to allocate Wounds and take saving throws until all Wounds have been resolved.
7. Select Another Weapon. After resolving all shots from the currently selected weapon, if the firing unit is equipped with differently named weapons that have yet to fire, select another weapon and repeat steps 3 to 6.
CHOOSE A TARGET
Once you have chosen the unit that you want to shoot with, choose a single enemy unit for them to shoot at. To do so, you must check the range and line of sight from your unit to the enemy unit you are targeting. Note that you may check the range and line of sight to multiple enemy units before deciding which one to shoot at and declaring it to your opponent. You cannot target a unit that is locked in combat.
Line of Sight
To target an enemy unit, at least one model must have line of sight to at least one model in the target unit. If no model has line of sight, then a different target must be chosen.
SELECT A WEAPON
Whilst some units are comprised entirely models with the same weaponry, many units are equipped with a variety of different weapons or contain models that are themselves equipped with more than one gun. When firing with a unit, completely resolve all attacks from the same weapons at the same time before moving onto any differently named weapons (see Select Another Weapon, below).
First, select a weapon that one or more models in your unit are equipped with. <snip>
All weapons have a maximum range, which is the furthest distance they can shoot. A weapon must be in range of the target unit to shoot. Here are examples of weapon ranges:
Weapon - Maximum Range
Laspistol - 12"
Boltgun - 24"
Autocannon - 48"
When checking range, simply measure from each firer to the nearest visible model in the target unit. Any weapon that is found to be out of range of all visible enemy models in the target unit cannot shoot. Which Models Can Fire?
Any model that has line of sight to at least one enemy model in the target unit and is found to be in range of that model can shoot.
All models in the unit must shoot at the same target unit. If a model cannot shoot at the same target as the other models in its unit then it cannot shoot at all in that phase.
Typically, a model can only fire a single shooting weapon in the same phase, although some models, such as vehicles or monstrous creatures, can shoot two or more. Once a model has fired its maximum number of weapons, it cannot fire again that phase.
therefore you measure from the weapon not the model.
You are literally making up rules and asserting them as RAW. Please stop doing so.
i am not making up rules. the instictive fire tule states:
Each weapon on this model automatically fires at the nearest enemy unit within range and line of sight.
the subject of that sentence is the weapon. therefore the range and line of sight is applied to the weapon. not the model.
Incorrect. If the sentence said "its" then you'd be correct.
As it is, it doesn't contradict the basic rulebook and so we use those rules.
2. since weapons =/= model, you measure from the weapon not the model because the rule says EACH WEAPON.
Quote the rule that tells you how to do so. Where on the weapon? How do I determine LoS - is it 360? 45 degrees?
3. this is a special rule, so it overrides any generic rule found in the rulebook.
in the rulebook its worded that you measure from the "model". in this case however the special rule overrides that notion by saying that each weapon fires at the nearest target.
Only when it conflicts. The rule, as worded, doesn't.
4. to further implicate the importance of specific terms (which is a great deal when dealing with rules in a 100% RaW way)
look at the table you posted. i will mark every instance the word model is used as a reference to where you measure/shoot from, when making a ranged shooting attack.
not once is the term weapon used when its determined from where you measure the range and LoS from.
and not once is the term weapon used in an interchangable way for the term model.
The term may not be. The point you measure from absolutely is.
in the special rule for the tyrannocite however it does use the term weapon. and therefore you should measure from the weapon, not the model.
Again a lack of rules based evidence on how to do so. It's like it doesn't exist or something.
Since the answer to "Where on the weapon do you measure from?" cannot be answered using actual rules, and your position (that your interpretation is RAW correct) requires it to exist, your position fails for lack of evidence.
Until you can show actual rules that tell you how to determine LoS and range from a non-vehicle weapon your argument has no basis in fact and must make up rules.
You cannot use the shooting rules for determining range as they require you measure from the firer, not the weapon. You cannot use the normal LoS rules as they require you use the model, not the weapon.
Cite rules other than IF as IF doesn't include how to measure range nor how to determine LoS.
My beautiful wife wrote:Trucks = Carnifex snack, Tanks = meals.
Just a question. Those claiming the weapon is making the shot. What Bs is a barbed strangler? Or a Venom Cannon? Or a Deathspitter? Where is this information found?
FlingitNow wrote: Just a question. Those claiming the weapon is making the shot. What Bs is a barbed strangler? Or a Venom Cannon? Or a Deathspitter? Where is this information found?
its not about whats "making the shot". the discussion is about from where to measure LoS and range
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2014/12/22 19:47:45
FlingitNow wrote: Just a question. Those claiming the weapon is making the shot. What Bs is a barbed strangler? Or a Venom Cannon? Or a Deathspitter? Where is this information found?
its not about whats "making the shot". the discussion is about from where to measure LoS and range
Nowhere in the instinctive fire rule does it state the weapons have firing arcs nor does it state it in the White Dwarf designers note. You have literally pulled this out of thin air. It simply says measure from the gun in the (non official) designers note and does not specify in the rule itself. In either case you would still revert to how a non vehicle shoots which is a 360 arc from the firer.
So if both the rule itself and the designers note have nothing about limited firing arcs (I have both rules prints in front of me) where did you get this from?
ok, you guys really need to read the posts before replying.
where do i have stated that RaW says that the weapons should have firing arcs? please read atleast some protions of the thread if you wanna make any contributions to the discussion.
Zande4 wrote: It simply says measure from the gun in the (non official) designers note and does not specify in the rule itself.
ok its the very last time i'm gonna do this quote:
Each weapon on this model automatically fires at the nearest enemy unit within range and line of sight.
i dont know how to specify it more in the rules than this to make clear that you measure from the weapon, not the model.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2014/12/23 12:19:48
RedNoak wrote: ok, you guys really need to read the posts before replying.
where do i have stated that RaW says that the weapons should have firing arcs? please read atleast some protions of the thread if you wanna make any contributions to the discussion.
Zande4 wrote: It simply says measure from the gun in the (non official) designers note and does not specify in the rule itself.
ok its the very last time i'm gonna do this quote:
Each weapon on this model automatically fires at the nearest enemy unit within range and line of sight.
i dont know how to specify it more in the rules than this to make clear that you measure from the weapon, not the model.
Explain this to me in plain English please.
How does measuring from the weapon = weapon has restricted firing arc? Please explain that to me. How are you getting the pod has to use the vehicles rules for shooting from "measure from weapon"
"within range and line of sight" Applies to MC correctly.
"Each weapon on this model automatically fires": The MC fires each weapon automatically.
You never measure from the weapon, please show which rule says so, by RaW...
DA:80-S+G+M+B++I-Pw40k01++D+++A+++WD100R++T(T)DM+
Roronoa Zoro wrote:When the world shoves you around, you just gotta stand up and shove back. It's not like somebody's gonna save you if you start babbling excuses. - Bring on the hardship. It's preferred in a path of carnage.
Manchu wrote:
It's like you take a Space Marine and say "what could make him cooler?" Instead of adding more super-genetic-psycho-organic modification, you take it all away. You have a regular human left in power armor and all the armies of hell at the gates. And she doesn't even flinch. Pure. Badass.
How does measuring from the weapon = weapon has restricted firing arc? Please explain that to me. How are you getting the pod has to use the vehicles rules for shooting from "measure from weapon"
sorry, but are you serious? or just trolling? i'm saying this now for the like 3rd time.
I NEVER SAID ANYTHING ABSOLUTE ABOUT FIRING ARCS AND VEHICLES IN CONJUNCTION WITH THE RAW INTERPRETATION OF THE INSTINCTIVE FIRE SPECIAL-RULE
but if you are not able to understand this, i doubt that any good can come from you when it comes to the understanding of ruletexting. -.-
@black talos
Spoiler:
i am not making up rules. the instictive fire tule states: Each weapon on this model automatically fires at the nearest enemy unit within range and line of sight.
the subject of that sentence is the weapon. therefore the range and line of sight is applied to the weapon. not the model.
[...]
1. like i said, the rule explicitly mentions the weapon beeing used as a point of reference for range and LoS, due to the fact that the rule states each weapon fires at the nearest, visible unit.
2. since weapons =/= model, you measure from the weapon not the model because the rule says EACH WEAPON.
3. this is a special rule, so it overrides any generic rule found in the rulebook. in the rulebook its worded that you measure from the "model". in this case however the special rule overrides that notion by saying that each weapon fires at the nearest target.
4. to further implicate the importance of specific terms (which is a great deal when dealing with rules in a 100% RaW way) look at the table you posted. i will mark every instance the word model is used as a reference to where you measure/shoot from, when making a ranged shooting attack.
not once is the term weapon used when its determined from where you measure the range and LoS from. and not once is the term weapon used in an interchangable way for the term model.
in the special rule for the tyrannocite however it does use the term weapon. and therefore you should measure from the weapon, not the model.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2014/12/23 13:51:17
How does measuring from the weapon = weapon has restricted firing arc? Please explain that to me. How are you getting the pod has to use the vehicles rules for shooting from "measure from weapon"
sorry, but are you serious? or just trolling? i'm saying this now for the like 3rd time.
I NEVER SAID ANYTHING ABSOLUTE ABOUT FIRING ARCS AND VEHICLES IN CONJUNCTION WITH THE RAW INTERPRETATION OF THE INSTINCTIVE FIRE SPECIAL-RULE
I'm pretty sure that is his point, and he is asking you what rules are you using to draw LOS from the weapon if not from the MC rules?
2. since weapons =/= model, you measure from the weapon not the model because the rule says EACH WEAPON.
Can you prove this with some rules please?
There are rules on how this is perhaps possible with Vehicles, but in any other case, you fire a weapon from the model.
Weapon = Model.
Automatically Appended Next Post: Some RaW on this in case you contest:
"Most models only get to fire one shot, however, some weapons are capable of firing more than once, as we’ll explain in more detail later."
As you can see from the rule above, "models" and "weapons" are interchangeable.
A model fires a weapon, but you can never separate a model from the weapon.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2014/12/23 14:25:11
DA:80-S+G+M+B++I-Pw40k01++D+++A+++WD100R++T(T)DM+
Roronoa Zoro wrote:When the world shoves you around, you just gotta stand up and shove back. It's not like somebody's gonna save you if you start babbling excuses. - Bring on the hardship. It's preferred in a path of carnage.
Manchu wrote:
It's like you take a Space Marine and say "what could make him cooler?" Instead of adding more super-genetic-psycho-organic modification, you take it all away. You have a regular human left in power armor and all the armies of hell at the gates. And she doesn't even flinch. Pure. Badass.
1. Just saying that doesn't make it true. It states each weapon fires and does so at the neatest target in range & LoS. The weapon us still being fired by the MC right?
2. Nope range is measured from the firer not from the weapon. Nothing here states measure from the weapon.
3. Clearly you have no understanding of how specific vs general works so don't try to use it. As for codex vs rulebook codex only wins in the case of direct conflict. Nothing in these "codex rules" contradicts measuring from the base.
4. Use of the word weapon here is either irrelevant or you are claiming the weapon itself is firing? If so please tell me the Bs of each weapon and where this information is found.
RedNoak wrote: ok, you guys really need to read the posts before replying.
where do i have stated that RaW says that the weapons should have firing arcs? please read atleast some protions of the thread if you wanna make any contributions to the discussion.
Zande4 wrote: It simply says measure from the gun in the (non official) designers note and does not specify in the rule itself.
ok its the very last time i'm gonna do this quote:
Each weapon on this model automatically fires at the nearest enemy unit within range and line of sight.
i dont know how to specify it more in the rules than this to make clear that you measure from the weapon, not the model.
Great - now, where are the rules for measuring from the weapon?
Do you measure from the tip of the weapon or the base? Please, for once, cite a rule other than Instinctive Fire (which doesn't tell you how to measure).
Without such a rule your interpretation cannot be correct.
My beautiful wife wrote:Trucks = Carnifex snack, Tanks = meals.
RedNoak wrote: ok, you guys really need to read the posts before replying.
where do i have stated that RaW says that the weapons should have firing arcs? please read atleast some protions of the thread if you wanna make any contributions to the discussion.
Zande4 wrote: It simply says measure from the gun in the (non official) designers note and does not specify in the rule itself.
ok its the very last time i'm gonna do this quote:
Each weapon on this model automatically fires at the nearest enemy unit within range and line of sight.
i dont know how to specify it more in the rules than this to make clear that you measure from the weapon, not the model.
All of the rules say that same thing.
All weapons have a maximum range, which is the furthest distance they can shoot. A
weapon must be in range of the target unit to shoot. Here are examples of weapon ranges:
Weapon - Maximum Range
Laspistol - 12"
Boltgun - 24"
Autocannon - 48"
When checking range, simply measure from each firer to the nearest visible model in the
target unit. Any weapon that is found to be out of range of all visible enemy models in the
target unit cannot shoot
This isn't the first (or last) time when GW designers do not know their own rules. I am sure they thought it would be cool and decided that it works like a vehicle, but then forgot what the rules tell us about MC's.
Naw wrote: This isn't the first (or last) time when GW designers do not know their own rules. I am sure they thought it would be cool and decided that it works like a vehicle, but then forgot what the rules tell us about MC's.
Agreed, they probably though modelling guns pointing at 5 different sides might have a bearing on written rules.
HIWPI i'd go for that though, with a pile of house rules lol
DA:80-S+G+M+B++I-Pw40k01++D+++A+++WD100R++T(T)DM+
Roronoa Zoro wrote:When the world shoves you around, you just gotta stand up and shove back. It's not like somebody's gonna save you if you start babbling excuses. - Bring on the hardship. It's preferred in a path of carnage.
Manchu wrote:
It's like you take a Space Marine and say "what could make him cooler?" Instead of adding more super-genetic-psycho-organic modification, you take it all away. You have a regular human left in power armor and all the armies of hell at the gates. And she doesn't even flinch. Pure. Badass.