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.
blaktoof wrote: pleasure show where it says you have two ion shields, an extra ion shield, an additional ion shield. etc.
and again each does not have a rule that you pick a facing, each knight has a rule that you pick a facing for its[singular ion shield].
can you quote where it says you pick for each shield?
can you quote anywhere where it says you have a second, extra, additional, different ion shield?
I have shown where it states clearly you have 2 ion shields. You are clearly trolling on that point.
So back to your claim that Imperial Knights have the rule not the ion Shield wargear? So even IKs without Ion Shields benefit?
As for the quote I have provided that many times each Ion shield has the rule.
And finally back to the troll point. I can only assume this is your concession? If you refuse to admit that there are 2 shields despite the rules explicitly tell us this what basis do we have for a discussion? You refuse to accept the English in the rules as evidence and refuse to accept or argue against points raised just repeating debunked arguments. If you disagree with my arguments then present an argument against my points rather than repeating debunked arguments. This does not move the discussion forward nor add weight to your argument.
You clearly are trolling past your first post, as you have never stated where they clearly have two ion shields.
you have refused to show there are two ion shields, clearly, ever. or answered any question about your lack of logic and reasoning. or backed anything up with a rules quote, other than purposefully moving words around in the quote that someone else present for Ion shield and its rules to support your argument as RAW.
yeah anyone can rearranged words in the rulebook and get new rules, that they are from the rulebook but rearranged does not make them rules as written, or even rules as intended.
arguments have been presented for you, and you ignore them and keep going back to what you claim is clearly stated- when its not. Then you rearrange words in the ion shield rule to support multiple shields being talked about as if it were RAW- when it is not, then dance around all the other issues with ignoring head in the sand type games and go back to "it clearly states they have two shields" when it never does.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2015/09/11 17:59:54
so you think a rule that allows you to take a specific type of model with a specific type of wargear and do something once, means you can do the same thing over and over once each time?
If you have a piece of wargear that says when X do Y, you do Y once for each piece of wargear you have that has that rule when X occurs. Yes that is exactly how a permissive ruleset works. Unless there is a restriction on how often you can do Y or the wording reads as boolean which becomes true if you have 1 or 1000 pieces of wargear with said rule.
Automatically Appended Next Post: Right let's deal with the 2 shields issue.
Premise 1: Sanctuary counts as an Ion Shield
Premise 2: Counts as and is are interchangeable in rules.
Conclusion 1: Sanctuary is an Ion Shield.
Premise 3: when you purchase Sanctuary it is added to your wargear and does not replace anything.
Premise 4: before you purchase you have an Ion Shield in your wargear.
Conclusion 2: you have an Ion Shield and a Sanctuary in your wargear.
Conclusion 1 + Conclusion 2: You have and Ion Shield and an Ion Shield in your wargear thus you have 2 Ion Shields.
Please point to the Premise that is incorrect?
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2015/09/11 18:08:11
Count 1- "Can a knight possess two shields?"- Without there being something somewhere that states that a knight can only possess one ion shield, which there isn't, the idea that a knight can have two shields seems to fall within the rules.
Count 2- "Is the ion shield listed in such a way that it is an item of wargear possessed by the knight?"- Yes, it is clearly listed as a piece of wargear, further, all the inherent rules for it are attributed to the wargear and NOT the knight itself.
Count 3- "Is Sanctuary an Ion Shield?"- YES, the first line of the entry states the "Sanctuary counts as an Ion shield."
Count 4- "Does Sanctuary replace the existing Ion Shield?"- Unlike items in other codexes which specifically state when a piece of wargear replaces another, Sanctuary says nothing about it replacing the currently possessed shield. Also, as stated before, if a model possesses an item of wargear such as a CCW and then purchases a second CCW, would it replace the first. The answer is of course no, you would purchase a second weapons and then gain an additional attack from the addition.
So... It would seem by the RAW that the first ion shield would cover one facing and the second another. You could even declare them on the same facing though it would be a waste. Anything otherwise would seem to be insinuated by the reader...
You are following a flawed line of reason, much like claiming an Asssult Cannon is an Assault Weapon because it has Assault in its name. Yes, the Ion Shield is an Ion Shield, and yes, Sanctuary is an Ion Shield. One is a 4++ facable, while the other is a 6++ all-around, yet both are still Ion Shields.
SJ
“For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world.”
- Ephesians 6:12
so you think a rule that allows you to take a specific type of model with a specific type of wargear and do something once, means you can do the same thing over and over once each time?
If you have a piece of wargear that says when X do Y, you do Y once for each piece of wargear you have that has that rule when X occurs. Yes that is exactly how a permissive ruleset works. Unless there is a restriction on how often you can do Y or the wording reads as boolean which becomes true if you have 1 or 1000 pieces of wargear with said rule.
Automatically Appended Next Post: Right let's deal with the 2 shields issue.
Premise 1: Sanctuary counts as an Ion Shield
Premise 2: Counts as and is are interchangeable in rules.
Conclusion 1: Sanctuary is an Ion Shield.
Premise 3: when you purchase Sanctuary it is added to your wargear and does not replace anything.
Premise 4: before you purchase you have an Ion Shield in your wargear.
Conclusion 2: you have an Ion Shield and a Sanctuary in your wargear.
Conclusion 1 + Conclusion 2: You have and Ion Shield and an Ion Shield in your wargear thus you have 2 Ion Shields.
jeffersonian000 wrote: You are following a flawed line of reason, much like claiming an Asssult Cannon is an Assault Weapon because it has Assault in its name. Yes, the Ion Shield is an Ion Shield, and yes, Sanctuary is an Ion Shield. One is a 4++ facable, while the other is a 6++ all-around, yet both are still Ion Shields.
SJ
A Sanctuary isn't called an Ion Shield in name it is called a Sanctuary (clue is in the title). It is an Ion Shield in the rules. Does an Ion Shield provide a 4++ in a facing? Then Sanctuary counts as providing a 4++ in a facing. So rules wise everything that is true for an Ion Shield is true for Sanctuary unless there is a specific exception like the fact Sanctuary additionally provides a 6++ in all other facings.
jeffersonian000 wrote: You are following a flawed line of reason, much like claiming an Asssult Cannon is an Assault Weapon because it has Assault in its name. Yes, the Ion Shield is an Ion Shield, and yes, Sanctuary is an Ion Shield. One is a 4++ facable, while the other is a 6++ all-around, yet both are still Ion Shields.
SJ
A Sanctuary isn't called an Ion Shield in name it is called a Sanctuary (clue is in the title). It is an Ion Shield in the rules. Does an Ion Shield provide a 4++ in a facing? Then Sanctuary counts as providing a 4++ in a facing. So rules wise everything that is true for an Ion Shield is true for Sanctuary unless there is a specific exception like the fact Sanctuary additionally provides a 6++ in all other facings.
I get the feeling you think you are preaching to the choir, when in fact the choir left a long time ago.
SJ
“For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world.”
- Ephesians 6:12
jeffersonian000 wrote: You are following a flawed line of reason, much like claiming an Asssult Cannon is an Assault Weapon because it has Assault in its name. Yes, the Ion Shield is an Ion Shield, and yes, Sanctuary is an Ion Shield. One is a 4++ facable, while the other is a 6++ all-around, yet both are still Ion Shields.
SJ
A Sanctuary isn't called an Ion Shield in name it is called a Sanctuary (clue is in the title). It is an Ion Shield in the rules. Does an Ion Shield provide a 4++ in a facing? Then Sanctuary counts as providing a 4++ in a facing. So rules wise everything that is true for an Ion Shield is true for Sanctuary unless there is a specific exception like the fact Sanctuary additionally provides a 6++ in all other facings.
I get the feeling you think you are preaching to the choir, when in fact the choir left a long time ago.
SJ
From the codex:
"Sanctuary counts as an ion shield. IN ADDITION, a knight equipped with sanctuary has a 6+ unvulnerable save against each facing that is not covered by the ion shield. Sanctuary can not be used to make saving throws against close combat attacks."
Sanctuary counts as a flat out ion shield with all the rules accorded to a normal ion shield in the codex. It gets the 6++ IN ADDITION to the whatever it would normally get by being an ion shield.
Since it clearly states that it is an ion shield with a 6++ in addition and we know that it doesnt replace the ion shield we already have, we know that we now have a 6++ on non-ion shield covered facing in addition to two normal ion shields.
Right. It is clear that the 6++ isn't from an Ion Shield (and in fact the entire Ion Shield rule would have to be rewritten - as I read it, an Ion Shield is not a 6++ on every facing!).
The 6++ is from Sanctuary, which in addition counts-as an Ion Shield.
It's obviously a second and entirely separate piece of wargear in that it has a different name.. There is NO wording whatsoever telling us that this second and entirely separate piece of wargear has any impact on an existing piece of wargear. There is NO wording whatsoever telling us that this second and entirely separate piece of wargear replaces an existing piece of wargear.
This new and entirely separate piece of wargear counts as an Ion Shield with some additional rules, but ISN'T an Ion Shield. It's a Relic called Sanctuary.
You have to follow ALL of the rules for your piece of wargear called Ion Shield, which involves picking a facing and getting a 4++.
You have to SEPARATELY follow ALL of the rules for your piece of wargear called Sanctuary, which involves picking a facing, getting a 4++ and getting a 6++ on all other facings.
There is NO wording telling you that you have to pick the same facing for both pieces of wargear.
Upgrade price has NO bearing on what the rules do. We aren't arguing whether or not an upgrade is undercosted, we're debating how the upgrade works.
RAW seems clear that you effectively have 4++ on two facings and 6++ on the other two.
NOW... my interpretation of RAI. I suspect strongly that GW wanted Sanctuary to REPLACE the existing Ion Shield wargear, but added no wording whatsoever to tell us that. If I were to play with Sanctuary, I would pick one facing of 4++ and three of 6++. I would allow opponents to pick two 4++'s, though, as this is what RAW allows.
TLDR - Yes. No. Yes. No. "Let's stay on topic." "Your mom stays on topic." THREAD LOCK
This guy gets it.^
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2015/09/11 20:34:07
Space Marines: Jacks of all trades yet masters of GRAV CANNONS!!!.
My Star Wars Imperial Codex Project: http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/641831.page It has 7 HQs, 2 Troop types with Dedicated Transports, 5 Elite units, 5 Fast Attack units, 6 Heavy Support units, 2 Formations with unique units not in the rest of the codex, and 2 LOW choices.
‘I do not care who knows the truth now, tomorrow, or in ten thousand years. Loyalty is its own reward.’ -Lion El' Jonson
There has never been a disagreement over how many Ion Shields a Knight with Sanctuary has, we all agree it's two. However, we are not in agreement on how many facable 4++ Shields there are. One camp says it's two facable Ion Shields plus an additional non-Ion Shield all-rounder, while the other camp says it's one facable Ion Shield plus the all-rounder Ion Shield. The argument occurs over grammar and English.
The best example I can think of that we have not fully covered far is how many weapons can a model shoot? The answer is only one, unless you have permission to shoot more, such as a Monstrous Creature shooting two, or a vehicle shooting all. In the same context, a Knight has permission to face one Ion Shield, and Sanctuary does not include language that adds another facing.
SJ
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2015/09/11 22:06:45
“For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world.”
- Ephesians 6:12
Shooting has a specific 'one per Model' restriction written into it though....
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.
jeffersonian000 wrote: There has never been a disagreement over how many Ion Shields a Knight with Sanctuary has, we all agree it's two. However, we are not in agreement on how many facable 4++ Shields there are. One camp says it's two facable Ion Shields plus an additional non-Ion Shield all-rounder, while the other camp says it's one facable Ion Shield plus the all-rounder Ion Shield. The argument occurs over grammar and English.
The best example I can think of that we have not fully covered far is how many weapons can a model shoot? The answer is only one, unless you have permission to shoot more, such as a Monstrous Creature shooting two, or a vehicle shooting all. In the same context, a Knight has permission to face one Ion Shield, and Sanctuary does not include language that adds another facing.
SJ
You are correct firing weapons is a great example. Permission to fire a weapon is permission to fire 2 weapons if you have them. Hence they had to write the specific restriction that models with more weapons can only fire one per phase. I assume this is you conceding?
jeffersonian000 wrote: There has never been a disagreement over how many Ion Shields a Knight with Sanctuary has, we all agree it's two.
Actually, Blacktoof has been asking for a demonstration of there being two shields. You must have him on ignore.
jeffersonian000 wrote: However, we are not in agreement on how many facable 4++ Shields there are. One camp says it's two facable Ion Shields plus an additional non-Ion Shield all-rounder, while the other camp says it's one facable Ion Shield plus the all-rounder Ion Shield. The argument occurs over grammar and English.
The best example I can think of that we have not fully covered far is how many weapons can a model shoot? The answer is only one, unless you have permission to shoot more, such as a Monstrous Creature shooting two, or a vehicle shooting all. In the same context, a Knight has permission to face one Ion Shield, and Sanctuary does not include language that adds another facing.
Except there is no rule forbidding the Sanctuary from facing its Shield in a different facing from the Ion Shield, nor a rule specifying that every Ion Shield's 4++ on a Knight be facing the same way. You choose a facing for each Knight's Ion Shield. That's it.
Are you a Wolf, a Sheep, or a Hound?
Megavolt wrote:They called me crazy…they called me insane…THEY CALLED ME LOONEY!! and boy, were they right.
jeffersonian000 wrote: There has never been a disagreement over how many Ion Shields a Knight with Sanctuary has, we all agree it's two.
Actually, Blacktoof has been asking for a demonstration of there being two shields. You must have him on ignore.
jeffersonian000 wrote: However, we are not in agreement on how many facable 4++ Shields there are. One camp says it's two facable Ion Shields plus an additional non-Ion Shield all-rounder, while the other camp says it's one facable Ion Shield plus the all-rounder Ion Shield. The argument occurs over grammar and English.
The best example I can think of that we have not fully covered far is how many weapons can a model shoot? The answer is only one, unless you have permission to shoot more, such as a Monstrous Creature shooting two, or a vehicle shooting all. In the same context, a Knight has permission to face one Ion Shield, and Sanctuary does not include language that adds another facing.
Except there is no rule forbidding the Sanctuary from facing its Shield in a different facing from the Ion Shield, nor a rule specifying that every Ion Shield's 4++ on a Knight be facing the same way. You choose a facing for each Knight's Ion Shield. That's it.
yeah I do not believe the RAW state sanctuary is a second, or extra shield.
"Sanctuary counts as an ion shield. IN ADDITION, a knight equipped with sanctuary has a 6+ invulnerable save against each facing that is not covered by the ion shield. Sanctuary can not be used to make saving throws against close combat attacks."
the thing sanctuary gives is the after "in addition" part.
sanctuary = knights ion shield and in addition sanctuary gives it a 6+ save on the non 4+ ion shield facing.
we aren't told "sanctuary counts as an ADDITIONAL ion shield, a knight equipped with sanctuary has a 6+ invulnerable save against each facing that is not covered by the ion shield. Sanctuary can not be used to make saving throws against close combat attacks."
sanctuary counts as an ion shield = the knights ion shield. not another ion shield. there is no language saying its a second ion shield, and the rules for ion shield further show there is no support for having more than one shield as they are singular in which facing the shield ends up on.
further from the wording of sanctuary it shows "a 6+ invulnerable save against each facing that is not covered by the ion shield."
the ion shield is again singular, it does not call out "the sanctuary" or "the ion shields" or "this ion shield". there is only one ion shield, even if you have sanctuary.
there are not multiple ion shields on a knight.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2015/09/11 23:07:48
jeffersonian000 wrote: There has never been a disagreement over how many Ion Shields a Knight with Sanctuary has, we all agree it's two.
Actually, Blacktoof has been asking for a demonstration of there being two shields. You must have him on ignore.
jeffersonian000 wrote: However, we are not in agreement on how many facable 4++ Shields there are. One camp says it's two facable Ion Shields plus an additional non-Ion Shield all-rounder, while the other camp says it's one facable Ion Shield plus the all-rounder Ion Shield. The argument occurs over grammar and English.
The best example I can think of that we have not fully covered far is how many weapons can a model shoot? The answer is only one, unless you have permission to shoot more, such as a Monstrous Creature shooting two, or a vehicle shooting all. In the same context, a Knight has permission to face one Ion Shield, and Sanctuary does not include language that adds another facing.
Except there is no rule forbidding the Sanctuary from facing its Shield in a different facing from the Ion Shield, nor a rule specifying that every Ion Shield's 4++ on a Knight be facing the same way. You choose a facing for each Knight's Ion Shield. That's it.
yeah I do not believe the RAW state sanctuary is a second, or extra shield.
"Sanctuary counts as an ion shield. IN ADDITION, a knight equipped with sanctuary has a 6+ invulnerable save against each facing that is not covered by the ion shield. Sanctuary can not be used to make saving throws against close combat attacks."
the thing sanctuary gives is the after "in addition" part.
sanctuary = knights ion shield and in addition sanctuary gives it a 6+ save on the non 4+ ion shield facing.
we aren't told "sanctuary counts as an ADDITIONAL ion shield, a knight equipped with sanctuary has a 6+ invulnerable save against each facing that is not covered by the ion shield. Sanctuary can not be used to make saving throws against close combat attacks."
sanctuary counts as an ion shield = the knights ion shield. not another ion shield. there is no language saying its a second ion shield, and the rules for ion shield further show there is no support for having more than one shield as they are singular in which facing the shield ends up on.
further from the wording of sanctuary it shows "a 6+ invulnerable save against each facing that is not covered by the ion shield."
the ion shield is again singular, it does not call out "the sanctuary" or "the ion shields" or "this ion shield". there is only one ion shield, even if you have sanctuary.
there are not multiple ion shields on a knight.
Definitely trolling now then? Again I ask you disprove oneof my premises.
Premise 1: Sanctuary counts as an Ion Shield
Premise 2: Counts as and is are interchangeable in rules.
Conclusion 1: Sanctuary is an Ion Shield.
Premise 3: when you purchase Sanctuary it is added to your wargear and does not replace anything.
Premise 4: before you purchase you have an Ion Shield in your wargear.
Conclusion 2: you have an Ion Shield and a Sanctuary in your wargear.
Conclusion 1 + Conclusion 2: You have and Ion Shield and an Ion Shield in your wargear thus you have 2 Ion Shields.
Please point to the Premise that is incorrect? Your blank refusal to accept that the rules aren't lying is hilarious and illustrates that the only 1 facing argument has absolutely no support and you know it.
so you are unable to reconcile that the RAW for ion shields is singular for a knight having a shield and facing, and the rules for sanctuary are also singular for how many ion shields a knight has.
This message was edited 3 times. Last update was at 2015/09/12 03:01:50
So is there permission to select more than one facing for ion shield? Is there a rule that gives you permission to set ion shield on more than one facing? thats the only real counter argument i see here
blaktoof wrote:so you are unable to reconcile that the RAW for ion shields is singular for a knight having a shield and facing, and the rules for sanctuary are also singular for how many ion shields a knight has.
Sanctuary says nothing about a Knight having only one shield, or that Sanctuary replaces a Shield. Ion Shields do not say they can only have one Ion Shield.
Can you demonstrate or quote the rule that either limits a model to one copy of a Wargear, even if one is a Relic? Or failing that, where this specific Wargear looses itself when replaced or only one version of it may exist?
If a Relic Pistol exists and is purchased, does the model lose access to all Pistols, or even prevent the purchase of a similar non-Relic version of Pistol? If a Captain purchases the Armour Indomitous, he doesn't lose his Power Armour, he actually keeps it (not that it actually DOES much of anything for the Captain, though).
Unless, of course, you can provide the quote to prove me wrong?
Whacked wrote:So is there permission to select more than one facing for ion shield? Is there a rule that gives you permission to set ion shield on more than one facing? thats the only real counter argument i see here
It says, "...{T}he controlling player must declare which facing each Imperial Knight's ion shield is covering."
So, each Imperial Knight's Ion Shield will cover one facing. Nothing about this restricts it to one facing if it has access to two Shields. But then, Sanctuary is the only way to GET two Ion Shields.
Are you a Wolf, a Sheep, or a Hound?
Megavolt wrote:They called me crazy…they called me insane…THEY CALLED ME LOONEY!! and boy, were they right.
After going through all the arguments again, I will concede that a Knight with Sanctuary only has one Ion Shield, ever. The point made that Sanctuary counts as an Ion Shield does coinside with the rules for Ion Shields (singular), rather than opening the possibility for having Ion Shields (multiple). In this I will admit that the additional 6++ all-around save is not in and of itself an Ion Shield, and therefore would not benefit from modifiers to Ion Shields, such as the Baronial front facing +1.
SJ
“For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world.”
- Ephesians 6:12
jeffersonian000 wrote: After going through all the arguments again, I will concede that a Knight with Sanctuary only has one Ion Shield, ever. The point made that Sanctuary counts as an Ion Shield does coinside with the rules for Ion Shields (singular), rather than opening the possibility for having Ion Shields (multiple). In this I will admit that the additional 6++ all-around save is not in and of itself an Ion Shield, and therefore would not benefit from modifiers to Ion Shields, such as the Baronial front facing +1.
SJ
So going back to claiming 1 shield and still refusing to argue against ANY of the premises that prove the Knight has 2. So you refuse to support your argument and just state stuff you know is not true ad nauseam. Your insistence on repeatedly stating things you know to be untrue does not help the discussion nor further your argument. I think we all know how this works now and I thank you for your concession though for your own sake I wish you had been more mature about it.
jeffersonian000 wrote: After going through all the arguments again, I will concede that a Knight with Sanctuary only has one Ion Shield, ever. The point made that Sanctuary counts as an Ion Shield does coinside with the rules for Ion Shields (singular), rather than opening the possibility for having Ion Shields (multiple). In this I will admit that the additional 6++ all-around save is not in and of itself an Ion Shield, and therefore would not benefit from modifiers to Ion Shields, such as the Baronial front facing +1.
SJ
So going back to claiming 1 shield and still refusing to argue against ANY of the premises that prove the Knight has 2. So you refuse to support your argument and just state stuff you know is not true ad nauseam. Your insistence on repeatedly stating things you know to be untrue does not help the discussion nor further your argument. I think we all know how this works now and I thank you for your concession though for your own sake I wish you had been more mature about it.
I already stated your premises follows a flawed logic argument, the flaws of which have already been pointed out a number of times.
SJ
“For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world.”
- Ephesians 6:12
So again with intentionally saying stuff you know to be untrue. As no one here as actually even attempted to arhue against either my premises or conclusions. So which of my premises is flawed. Or which conclusion foes not follow from the premise?
Premise 1: Sanctuary counts as an Ion Shield
Premise 2: Counts as and is are interchangeable in rules.
Conclusion 1: Sanctuary is an Ion Shield.
Premise 3: when you purchase Sanctuary it is added to your wargear and does not replace anything.
Premise 4: before you purchase you have an Ion Shield in your wargear.
Conclusion 2: you have an Ion Shield and a Sanctuary in your wargear.
Conclusion 1 + Conclusion 2: You have and Ion Shield and an Ion Shield in your wargear thus you have 2 Ion Shields.
Please point to the Premise that is incorrect? Your blank refusal to accept that the rules aren't lying is hilarious and illustrates that the only 1 facing argument has absolutely no support and you know it.
Charistoph , I'm totally going to model a warboss straddling Gazbags Blitzbike and a second bike just for you.
"...has a 6+ invulnerable save against each facing that is not covered by ITS ION SHIELD."-
Did we notice the rule for Sanctuary itself refers to there being only 1 ion shield? Not ion SHIELDS which is generally how we pluralize in English. So if the rule itself only refers to one ion shield... And it tells you it counts as an ion shield (meaning 1)... How many ion shields did the writer think were present?
Btw, I agree that wraith knights should cost more to exist.
Automatically Appended Next Post: But yall who said that were pushing a silly straw man down the street.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2015/09/12 11:12:31
FratHammer wrote: Charistoph , I'm totally going to model a warboss straddling Gazbags Blitzbike and a second bike just for you.
"...has a 6+ invulnerable save against each facing that is not covered by ITS ION SHIELD."-
Did we notice the rule for Sanctuary itself refers to there being only 1 ion shield? Not ion SHIELDS which is generally how we pluralize in English. So if the rule itself only refers to one ion shield... And it tells you it counts as an ion shield (meaning 1)... How many ion shields did the writer think were present?
Btw, I agree that wraith knights should cost more to exist.
Automatically Appended Next Post: But yall who said that were pushing a silly straw man down the street.
Yes it is singular shield because the Sanctuary provides a singular shield. The fact that the knight that takes it may already have another shield isn't the concern of Sanctuary. It is at this point undisputed that you have 2 shields. Even the other side fully accepts that.
