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.

You cannot modify or override the shooting sequence without an entirely new shooting sequence that explains how to fire a weapon a model is not equipped with. The only working interpretation is for the gun emplacement to count as an equipped weapon for the shooting sequence.

Saying you can use the firing models BS but not its special rules is cherry picking.

The rules for gun emplacements don't say anything about using the firing model's ballistic skill, only that it may fire the weapon instead of its own, following the normal rules for shooting.

The normal rules for shooting tell you to choose a weapon the modern is equipped with, but we know the model is not equipped with a Quad Gun. The rules for gun emplacements however allow us to fire the weapon instead of the model's own weapon, so the model is allowed to fire in this case a Quad Gun instead.

That does not make the Quad Gun the model's weapon, though; it is explicitly fired "instead of (the model's) own weapon", not " as if it were the model's weapon ".

Just to clarify, you are arguing that quad guns do not get to use the firing models BS and special rules?

In not saying that at all, but neither of those things are relevant.

I'd say their pretty relevant. You seem to think that a model with Preferred Enemy would not apply to Quad Guns, etc...

It's pretty implicit in the rules as to how this works, I think you just don't want it to work.

 Mr. Shine wrote:
In not saying that at all, but neither of those things are relevant.

Of course it is relevant. If a model fires a quad gun using its own BS and special rules then it is treating the quad gun as one of its ranged weapons. There is no other way to play it.

The rules for gun emplacements make no specific reference to the model's ballistic skill or special rules; you seem to be confused with the rules for emplaced weapons on battlements (hint: a Quad Gun on an Aegis Defence Line isn't an emplaced weapon on a building's battlements).

The issue is whether the Quad Gun is one of the model's weapons, and it is not. That is attempting to apply the model's special Nebuloscope special rule, which unfortunately does not apply.


Preferred Enemy has completely different wording and at a brief glance works fine when firing a Quad Gun.

You're taking your own assumption and opinion of how the rules should work and adopting that without properly referencing the rules.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
And for the record I have zero vested interest in this rules argument; I have no Necron opponent and I'm simply arguing based on the rules.

I just want ot be clear here, on these points.

1. The Aegis Quad Gun , is not a ranged weapon.

2. That you do not use the BS of the model firing it.

Hollismason wrote:
I just want ot be clear here, on these points.

1. The Aegis Quad Gun , is not a ranged weapon.

2. That you do not use the BS of the model firing it.

No one is arguing either of those points, and they're not relevant to the actual issue with the rules here.

If you think they're relevant to whether Tomb Blades firing a Quad Gun on an Aegis Defence Line convey Ignores Cover please explain how.

 Mr. Shine wrote:
The rules for gun emplacements make no specific reference to the model's ballistic skill or special rules; you seem to be confused with the rules for emplaced weapons on battlements (hint: a Quad Gun on an Aegis Defence Line isn't an emplaced weapon on a building's battlements).

The issue is whether the Quad Gun is one of the model's weapons, and it is not. That is attempting to apply the model's special Nebuloscope special rule, which unfortunately does not apply.


Preferred Enemy has completely different wording and at a brief glance works fine when firing a Quad Gun.

You're taking your own assumption and opinion of how the rules should work and adopting that without properly referencing the rules.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
And for the record I have zero vested interest in this rules argument; I have no Necron opponent and I'm simply arguing based on the rules.

I'm not confusing anything, I am perfectly well aware of the difference between gun emplacements and emplaced weapons. The reason I bring up BS is because the gun emplacement rules do not specifically allow the firing model to use its BS. Instead it only says "following the normal rules for shooting".

The normal rules for shooting mean the firing models fires the gun as one of its ranged weapons. There is no other way in the rules to fire it.

So it is fired using the firing models BS and all special rules, including nebuloscope. You have no rules basis for excluding nebuloscope but allowing every other special rule.

Hollismason wrote:
I just want ot be clear here, on these points.

1. The Aegis Quad Gun , is not a ranged weapon.

2. That you do not use the BS of the model firing it.

2 isn't even correct.

 Mr. Shine wrote:

Hollismason wrote:
I just want ot be clear here, on these points.

1. The Aegis Quad Gun , is not a ranged weapon.

2. That you do not use the BS of the model firing it.

No one is arguing either of those points, and they're not relevant to the actual issue with the rules here.

If you think they're relevant to whether Tomb Blades firing a Quad Gun on an Aegis Defence Line convey Ignores Cover please explain how.

Do you feel these two statements accurately reflect what you are saying? If not explain then how a Model uses a ranged weapon without using it's ballistic skill, explain how you do not use the rules for ranged weapons for the Aegis Quad Gun.

Dude, this can get worse, think about a vindicare manning a Macro cannon.

Hollismason wrote:
Do you feel these two statements accurately reflect what you are saying? If not explain then how a Model uses a ranged weapon without using it's ballistic skill, explain how you do not use the rules for ranged weapons for the Aegis Quad Gun.

The gun emplacement rules are clear on this. Follow the normal rules for shooting, with the exception granted to allow e model to fire the Quad Gun instead of its own weapon.

To be clear you do think that a Aegis Defense line is a ranged weapon.

Of course it is. Your point please, finally?

Okay so it uses the models BS and it is a ranged weapon used by the model.

Hollismason wrote:
Okay so it uses the models BS and it is a ranged weapon used by the model.

And? Nebulascope says it affects ranged weapons owned by the model, not ones used by them.

 CrownAxe wrote:

Hollismason wrote:
Okay so it uses the models BS and it is a ranged weapon used by the model.

And? Nebulascope says it affects ranged weapons owned by the model, not ones used by them.

Actually it says "its ranged weapons", which would encompass all ranged weapons that it uses. It says nothing about "owned" or those listed in the wargear.

Tekron wrote:

 CrownAxe wrote:

Hollismason wrote:
Okay so it uses the models BS and it is a ranged weapon used by the model.

And? Nebulascope says it affects ranged weapons owned by the model, not ones used by them.

Actually it says "its ranged weapons", which would encompass all ranged weapons that it uses. It says nothing about "owned" or those listed in the wargear.

"Its" implies ownership. They don't own the quad gun

Tekron wrote:
Actually it says "its ranged weapons", which would encompass all ranged weapons that it uses. It says nothing about "owned" or those listed in the wargear.

Exact, word for word quote from the Nebuloscope rules:

"If a model is equipped with a nebuloscope, all of its ranged weapons have the Ignores Cover special rule."

As CrownAxe says, it must be the model's weapon, not simply a weapon it fires.

If you had actually read the first page properly you would have seen this in my argument sooner

 CrownAxe wrote:

Tekron wrote:

 CrownAxe wrote:

Hollismason wrote:
Okay so it uses the models BS and it is a ranged weapon used by the model.

And? Nebulascope says it affects ranged weapons owned by the model, not ones used by them.

Actually it says "its ranged weapons", which would encompass all ranged weapons that it uses. It says nothing about "owned" or those listed in the wargear.

"Its" implies ownership. They don't own the quad gun

"Its" does not imply ownership, it implies belonging or association with something else.

Tekron wrote:
"Its" does not imply ownership, it implies belonging or association with something else.

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/its

"the possessive form of it"

 Mr. Shine wrote:

Tekron wrote:
Actually it says "its ranged weapons", which would encompass all ranged weapons that it uses. It says nothing about "owned" or those listed in the wargear.

Exact, word for word quote from the Nebuloscope rules:

"If a model is equipped with a nebuloscope, all of its ranged weapons have the Ignores Cover special rule."

As CrownAxe says, it must be the model's weapon, not simply a weapon it fires.

If you had actually read the first page properly you would have seen this in my argument sooner

I did read the first page and saw your initial argument before you shifted the goalposts and started arguing about the gun emplacements wording.

A weapon a model fires is one of its ranged weapons according to the English language. It does not need to own the ranged weapon, it must simply be associated with it for it to be its.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Mr. Shine wrote:

Tekron wrote:
"Its" does not imply ownership, it implies belonging or association with something else.

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/its

"the possessive form of it"

"The tomb blade is going to fire its quad gun" works perfectly well. Possessive grammar does not imply ownership.

Tekron wrote:
I did read the first page and saw your initial argument before you shifted the goalposts and started arguing about the gun emplacements wording.

No, I moved us to discussing the actual rules in question.

A weapon a model fires is one of its ranged weapons according to the English language. It does not need to own the ranged weapon, it must simply be associated with it for it to be its.

This is just plain wrong.

A weapon a model fires is a weapon a model fires, which may or may not be the model's weapon. In this case it is not the model's weapon. The rules even make this distinction - "fired instead of (the model's) weapon".

If I'm driving your car that does not mean it is my car.

Tekron wrote:
"The tomb blade is going to fire its quad gun" works perfectly well. Possessive grammar does not imply ownership.

In this case it does.

 Mr. Shine wrote:


If I'm driving your car that does not mean it is my car.

It means you are in possession of my car, and it is in possession of you as its driver.

Tekron wrote:
"The tomb blade is going to fire its quad gun" works perfectly well. Possessive grammar does not imply ownership.

In this case it does.

I'm going to count this as the point where I won this argument. That is obvious special pleading.

Tekron wrote:

 Mr. Shine wrote:


If I'm driving your car that does not mean it is my car.

It means you are in possession of my car, and it is in possession of you as its driver.

Nebulascope doesn't care about possession, it cares about "its ranged weapons"

 CrownAxe wrote:

Tekron wrote:

 Mr. Shine wrote:


If I'm driving your car that does not mean it is my car.

It means you are in possession of my car, and it is in possession of you as its driver.

Nebulascope doesn't care about possession, it cares about "its ranged weapons"

The quad gun is one of "its ranged weapons", grammatically speaking. Argue with the dictionary definition of "its" all you like.

Tekron wrote:
It means you are in possession of my car, and it is in possession of you as its driver.

I don't think you understand the concept of possession.

I'm going to count this as the point where I won this argument. That is obvious special pleading.

Run away, by all means. Sticking your fingers in your ears and shouting does not make you right.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Tekron wrote:
The quad gun is one of "its ranged weapons", grammatically speaking. Argue with the dictionary definition of "its" all you like.

Prove it. The quad gun is fired instead of one of the model's weapons but it is never stated it becomes its, or even is fired as if it is its (the model's) weapons.

 Mr. Shine wrote:

Tekron wrote:
It means you are in possession of my car, and it is in possession of you as its driver.

I don't think you understand the concept of possession.

Irony! You are the one insisting that linguistic possession is the same thing as actual ownership. Do you not possess the car then? Are you not its driver?