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.
Charistoph, first, you fail to realize that the Basic Vs. Advanced rules don't apply here at all and second, you go on to say "They both cannot be in place at the same time without denying one from working fully, therefore a conflict has arisen. "
By saying that, you admit that my position's interpretation is not a complete negation of either rule. Only a complete negation invokes the "conflict" referred to in the "Basic vs. Advanced" rules clause.
You are wanting people to accept an interpretation of both rules that negates one rule from functioning COMPLETELY over an interpretation that allows both rules to function harmoniously. The fact that both rules can be interpreted to function harmoniously, without completely negating one another, means that there is no "Conflict" that invokes the "Basic vs. Advanced" clause.
You need to support what your basis is for an interpretation that negates one rule entirely, without express language/permission to do so (note, the Basic vs. Advanced clause does not lend the support you need). Absent such support, the alternative position must prevail.
You are choosing to interpret the rules to be doing the same thing at the same time, but in reality and practice, they are not. Your forced reading/interpretation and application of the rules is the problem here =/.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2015/10/28 21:01:24
Jesus Christ changed my life, He can do the same for you!
But if Lance counts it as 12, then QS isn't counting it as 13, is it?
If lance counts it as 12 it is because it is counted as 13 by QS. They are both applying. You can say if its 12 its not 13, but if its 13 then its 12. the end result is if you are counting it at 12 it is because it was counted as 13 to make it 12.
If you are not counting it as 12, it could never be a value higher than 12 from the lance rules.
QS says nothing about ignoring lance, or lance not working, if you are not modifying the value of 13 for lance, you are ignoring lance.
if you are modifying the value of 11 to 13, you have satisfied the rules for QS.
if you then modify the value to 12 because of lance, you have satisfied the rules for both. It is treated as 13, and anything 12 or higher is then treated as 12.
If you modify the value of 11 to 13, and then apply lance, and then apply QS again without reapplying lance you are saying that QS ignores anything that modifies the armor value, and or ignores the lance special rule- which its rule does not state, so therefore you have again modify the value to 12 for lance, you can then make the claim that QS has to modify it to 13..and then this repeats for ever.
so either we accept that you can satisfy the RAW of both rules by making it armor 13 from 11, which is a trigger specifically for lance weapons which will treat the armor 13(which it is) as 12.
or we stop playing because the shot cannot be resolved as it is in an infinite loop of 11>[13>12>13>12>13>12>etc]
Begin *hopefully* humorous and facetious post (because Warhammer is serious business):
Didn't they teach anyone order of operations in school? The reason why there is an order of operations in math is because it just makes sense-logically-to do certain things in a certain way in a certain order.
Using this idea called logic, we realize that it just makes sense to interpret and apply the QS and Lance rules as Blacktoof and others have pointed out.
It does not, however, make equal sense to have QS apply and not the Lance rule.
Since it makes, at the very least, less sense to have QS apply but Lance not apply, both QS and Lance should apply for a job at Target.
/End *hopefully* humorous and facetious post (because Warhammer is serious business).
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2015/10/28 21:06:49
Jesus Christ changed my life, He can do the same for you!
To say that the QS rule "counts as" doesn't mean the vehicle's av is actually above 12 to allow the lance to work would open up the option to ignore it completely. Because if "counts as' isn't good enough for lance to work, then it wouldn't be enough for me to have to penetrate the higher value.
Lance HAS to happen AFTER QS because qs CAUSES lance to come into play. They cannot occur simultaneously because that isn't how causality works. Nothing can react instantly to an action, nor can it react before the action it is reacting to has occurred. Reactions happen after they have a cause, no matter how minute the time between.
Lance applies as a direct reaction to QS changing the av of the vehicle it is equipped upon.
The rules give permission to apply multiple set modifiers should it occur.
Lance lowers the set av of 13 to a 12 because that is how the rule works in ANY situation where an av is greater than 12.
Lance overrides (some) of the benefit of QS and lowers the bonus given by QS from 13 to 12.
But if Lance counts it as 12, then QS isn't counting it as 13, is it?
If lance counts it as 12 it is because it is counted as 13 by QS. They are both applying. You can say if its 12 its not 13, but if its 13 then its 12. the end result is if you are counting it at 12 it is because it was counted as 13 to make it 12.
If you are not counting it as 12, it could never be a value higher than 12 from the lance rules.
QS says nothing about ignoring lance, or lance not working, if you are not modifying the value of 13 for lance, you are ignoring lance.
if you are modifying the value of 11 to 13, you have satisfied the rules for QS.
if you then modify the value to 12 because of lance, you have satisfied the rules for both. It is treated as 13, and anything 12 or higher is then treated as 12.
If you modify the value of 11 to 13, and then apply lance, and then apply QS again without reapplying lance you are saying that QS ignores anything that modifies the armor value, and or ignores the lance special rule- which its rule does not state, so therefore you have again modify the value to 12 for lance, you can then make the claim that QS has to modify it to 13..and then this repeats for ever.
so either we accept that you can satisfy the RAW of both rules by making it armor 13 from 11, which is a trigger specifically for lance weapons which will treat the armor 13(which it is) as 12.
or we stop playing because the shot cannot be resolved as it is in an infinite loop of 11>[13>12>13>12>13>12>etc]
Or because there is a loop going on causing a conflict we go by basic vs advance because there are two special rules trying to apply a set modifier and one of the special rules is from a codex while the other in from the BRB.
Lance and QS are CONSTANT, they are both constantly being applied. Lance does NOT have permission to effect another special rule. Since both special rules are going around in a circle we logically use the rules given to us on how to resolve this conflict.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Lythrandire Biehrellian wrote: The only way for there to be a conflict in the rules would be if the rules said to apply A set modifier last. It does not. It says to apply set modifiers (plural) last. You have a set modifier, it makes you armor value 13, which causes me to have another set modifier, which brings that 13 down to a 12. You cannot show that there can only be one set modifier active at a time, you cannot show how the modifier for quantum shielding reacts to the modifier given by lance.
I can show the opposite in both of these cases. QS counts as av13, that lets lance then modify with an additional set value bringing it down to twelve because there can be multiple set values in effect, and lance gives permission to affect the outcome of QS.
WIth multiple set modifies in place qs being set modifier av 13 and lance being set modifier av 12 these are two different values and is thus a conflict. You think that qs only seems to apply once which is not the case. They are both being applied constantly. This creates a conflict since lance is trying to change the av value given by QS and QS's av value is different from Lance. The rules tell us how to handle a conflict when there are multiple set modifiers of different values.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2015/10/29 00:13:00
It's easy to assume that people arguing an interpretation you disagree with are just looking for an advantage for themselves... But it's quite often not the case.
If you do not apply QS, you can not apply Lance. Simple fact. A vehicle that has an AV of 12 or less is completely unaffected by the Lance rule. The only way that lance functions is if the vehicle armor is greater than 12. It is literally the more specific of the 2 rules.
As to timing, I have said before that the game is linear, and have had people tell me it is not. Go look at the FnP threads. There is a certain elegance to playing the game in a linear fashion. A lot of the rules make a lot more sense, and the sequencing rule actually does something, while treating ALL rules equally.
My turn you apply QS before I apply Lance, your turn you apply Lance before QS.
Same with FnP vs any other advanced rule that activates off of a wound. Removing a model is a basic rule and all special rules supersede it.
All the worlds a joke and the people merely punchlines
mortetvie wrote:Charistoph, first, you fail to realize that the Basic Vs. Advanced rules don't apply here at all and second, you go on to say "They both cannot be in place at the same time without denying one from working fully, therefore a conflict has arisen. "
Because that is how it works.
mortetvie wrote:By saying that, you admit that my position's interpretation is not a complete negation of either rule. Only a complete negation invokes the "conflict" referred to in the "Basic vs. Advanced" rules clause.
Ummm... No. Conflict is when two things disagree on how something should be worded. If QS said that Lance Attacks did not modify this AV, then it would be clean and clear and not in conflict.
mortetvie wrote:You are wanting people to accept an interpretation of both rules that negates one rule from functioning COMPLETELY over an interpretation that allows both rules to function harmoniously. The fact that both rules can be interpreted to function harmoniously, without completely negating one another, means that there is no "Conflict" that invokes the "Basic vs. Advanced" clause.
It happens all the time in this game, so why cannot it happen here. Not all rules are designed to function harmoniously, these two are an examples. Can you provide a rule that every rule must be in full force and work harmoniously with others?
mortetvie wrote:You need to support what your basis is for an interpretation that negates one rule entirely, without express language/permission to do so (note, the Basic vs. Advanced clause does not lend the support you need). Absent such support, the alternative position must prevail.
Actually, BvA does support my interpretation for every reason I have given you. They are both Set Value modifiers. Neither one is given permission to change any another set value modifier. Multiple Modifiers does not provide any basis for a modifier to be superior to another based on timing of application or because of another modifier.
mortetvie wrote:You are choosing to interpret the rules to be doing the same thing at the same time, but in reality and practice, they are not. Your forced reading/interpretation and application of the rules is the problem here =/.
Actually, they are. Lance does not just do it on a hit. QS is trying to have the AV count as 13, while Lance is trying to have the AV count as 12. You are trying to force a timing rule or an order of operations on the situation that simply is not supported by the rules presented so far. It may work in real life, but this game is not real life.
blaktoof wrote:
But if Lance counts it as 12, then QS isn't counting it as 13, is it?
If lance counts it as 12 it is because it is counted as 13 by QS. They are both applying. You can say if its 12 its not 13, but if its 13 then its 12. the end result is if you are counting it at 12 it is because it was counted as 13 to make it 12.
Again, if only multiple modifiers worked that way.
blaktoof wrote:QS says nothing about ignoring lance, or lance not working, if you are not modifying the value of 13 for lance, you are ignoring lance.
No, I'm granting primacy to QS because it is conflict since Lance says nothing about modifying modifiers.
blaktoof wrote:if you are modifying the value of 11 to 13, you have satisfied the rules for QS.
if you then modify the value to 12 because of lance, you have satisfied the rules for both. It is treated as 13, and anything 12 or higher is then treated as 12.
If you modify the value of 11 to 13, and then apply lance, and then apply QS again without reapplying lance you are saying that QS ignores anything that modifies the armor value, and or ignores the lance special rule- which its rule does not state, so therefore you have again modify the value to 12 for lance, you can then make the claim that QS has to modify it to 13..and then this repeats for ever.
If Lance was -2 AV, would you consider QS superior or would you still enforce the -2 AV?
blaktoof wrote:so either we accept that you can satisfy the RAW of both rules by making it armor 13 from 11, which is a trigger specifically for lance weapons which will treat the armor 13(which it is) as 12.
or we stop playing because the shot cannot be resolved as it is in an infinite loop of 11>[13>12>13>12>13>12>etc]
Or you can simply recognize the fact that there is a conflict so QS has primacy.
mortetvie wrote:Begin *hopefully* humorous and facetious post (because Warhammer is serious business):
Didn't they teach anyone order of operations in school? The reason why there is an order of operations in math is because it just makes sense-logically-to do certain things in a certain way in a certain order.
Using this idea called logic, we realize that it just makes sense to interpret and apply the QS and Lance rules as Blacktoof and others have pointed out.
It does not, however, make equal sense to have QS apply and not the Lance rule.
Since it makes, at the very least, less sense to have QS apply but Lance not apply, both QS and Lance should apply for a job at Target.
/End *hopefully* humorous and facetious post (because Warhammer is serious business).
Yeup. Math nerd here. There is even a chance that I understood order of operations before you were born (not a high one, just a possibility). In fact, I've mentioned it ad nauseum on this and other threads because multiple modifiers do have an order of operations, and there is nothing about when it applies to the model.
Now, here's the thing, you are trying to apply an order of operations that only exists in the Lance rule while ignoring the order of operations established in the rules.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
megatrons2nd wrote: If you do not apply QS, you can not apply Lance. Simple fact. A vehicle that has an AV of 12 or less is completely unaffected by the Lance rule. The only way that lance functions is if the vehicle armor is greater than 12. It is literally the more specific of the 2 rules.
As to timing, I have said before that the game is linear, and have had people tell me it is not. Go look at the FnP threads. There is a certain elegance to playing the game in a linear fashion. A lot of the rules make a lot more sense, and the sequencing rule actually does something, while treating ALL rules equally.
My turn you apply QS before I apply Lance, your turn you apply Lance before QS.
Same with FnP vs any other advanced rule that activates off of a wound. Removing a model is a basic rule and all special rules supersede it.
Except that doesn't apply in this case because there is a different order of operations in play when dealing with multiple modifiers.
If you have a Str 3 model that has a special rule that allows it to treat its Str as x2 when it charges, and it is carrying an Axe, What would its end Str be for its Attacks on the Charge?
If you said, "8", you would be incorrect. It would be 7, just as if it had a Power Fist and Furious Charge. The order of operations would double the Str of the user and then apply the bonus from the Axe.
This is NOT a timbe-based linear order of operations at this point, it has its own order. Yet, I have people telling me otherwise without providing the proper rules to support their claims.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2015/10/29 01:06:56
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.
It is an order of operations thing in the sequencing rules. You have stated, that they are always active. The rules are thus, from the point you purchased the model, using these active rules, correct. Now using the sequencing rule that tells you what to do when two different rules tell you to do something at the same time, the player whose turn it is decides what order the rules operate in. There is an order, just because you refuse to acknowledge it does not mean it is not there. I suppose though, since it is a beginning of the game thing you would have to dice off to determine which interpretation is active for the whole game. Yay, another die roll before we can even begin playing!
Now look what you've done. Insert smiley of your choice here.
Or you could apply the rules linearly, and use the sequencing, and have QS go first then lance one turn, and the other way the next.
Also, a further note. The modifiers rules specifically say no characteristic can be modified above 10 except wounds and attacks, so I guess this is a moot argument because it is an impossible rule to apply. Hey we have to play the RAW right? Sorry the vehicles can go over it natively, but there are no allowed modifiers for it in the rules. RAW QS dos nothing Hazzah!
All the worlds a joke and the people merely punchlines
Charistoph, you err in that you are using the dictionary to define certain terms and fail to realize that GW defines for us what they mean by "conflict" and "Basic" or "Advanced" rules.
The type of conflict that triggers the Basic Versus Advanced rules is one where one rule contradicts another or prevents one from working at all.
Anyway, have fun with how you want to play QS. Too bad you'll never see those rules interpreted as you see them in ANY competitive event. That is, unless you happen to run one yourself and act as head judge but then we probably wouldn't consider that a competitive event .
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2015/10/29 02:01:21
Jesus Christ changed my life, He can do the same for you!
Sequencing matters here because one rule being active CAUSES another rule to activate. If quantum shielding didn't cause lance to occurs, you would have a point. But it does, so you do not. You also haven't told me where in the rule it says that something can't be modified by multiple successive set values. You determine set values last, not a set value. If a rule has already affected a unit, where does it say that rule cannot be superseded by another should another come into play after?
Lythrandire Biehrellian wrote: Sequencing matters here because one rule being active CAUSES another rule to activate. If quantum shielding didn't cause lance to occurs, you would have a point. But it does, so you do not. You also haven't told me where in the rule it says that something can't be modified by multiple successive set values. You determine set values last, not a set value. If a rule has already affected a unit, where does it say that rule cannot be superseded by another should another come into play after?
It probably would have been more accurate to say "if a rule such as QS is already affecting a unit , where does it say that a rule that modifies a characteristic (like QS does) cannot be further modified by another rule that also modifies that same characteristic?" But I think we are in agreement overall. The point still stands.
By analogy, if you look at a rule that would read "The unit counts its LD as 10 until it fails its first LD test" and another rule that says "When a unit is affected by this attack, treat it's LD as 8 if it is above 8" you would count your LD as 10 for that unit until it is targeted as by the attack that modifies the LD down to 8 for the duration of that attack. One rule would have a unit's LD set to 10 but nowhere in that rule does it say that the LD cannot modified higher or lower any further... Unless it were the Stubborn rule...Since QS does not specify that the AV of 13 CANNOT be further modified by anything else, it CAN be modified further by something else.
Think of QS as a flashlight that is always on until a Penetrating hit is suffered and the Lance rule as something that weakens the intensity of the light shining from that flashlight when the flashlight is affected by the Lance rule. Makes simple sense but sometimes simple sense doesn't make sense to some people. That makes no sense.
This message was edited 6 times. Last update was at 2015/10/29 02:25:14
Jesus Christ changed my life, He can do the same for you!
megatrons2nd wrote: It is an order of operations thing in the sequencing rules. You have stated, that they are always active. The rules are thus, from the point you purchased the model, using these active rules, correct. Now using the sequencing rule that tells you what to do when two different rules tell you to do something at the same time, the player whose turn it is decides what order the rules operate in. There is an order, just because you refuse to acknowledge it does not mean it is not there. I suppose though, since it is a beginning of the game thing you would have to dice off to determine which interpretation is active for the whole game. Yay, another die roll before we can even begin playing!
Now look what you've done. Insert smiley of your choice here.
Or you could apply the rules linearly, and use the sequencing, and have QS go first then lance one turn, and the other way the next.
Also, a further note. The modifiers rules specifically say no characteristic can be modified above 10 except wounds and attacks, so I guess this is a moot argument because it is an impossible rule to apply. Hey we have to play the RAW right? Sorry the vehicles can go over it natively, but there are no allowed modifiers for it in the rules. RAW QS dos nothing Hazzah!
If you look at vehicle characteristics it says they follow many different rules and their own set of characteristics. Might need to pay attention to the rules a little more. But this is getting off topic.
Since they are always active when do they resolve? The sequencing rule tells us
"While playing zwarhammer 40k, you'll occasionally find that two or more rules are to be resolved at the same time - normally 'at the start of the Movement phase' or similar."
There is no 'when attacking a vehicle with...." or "On a roll of a X" or "at the start of X phase"
Lythrandire Biehrellian wrote: Sequencing matters here because one rule being active CAUSES another rule to activate. If quantum shielding didn't cause lance to occurs, you would have a point. But it does, so you do not. You also haven't told me where in the rule it says that something can't be modified by multiple successive set values. You determine set values last, not a set value. If a rule has already affected a unit, where does it say that rule cannot be superseded by another should another come into play after?
It probably would have been more accurate to say "if a rule such as QS is already affecting a unit , where does it say that a rule that modifies a characteristic (like QS does) cannot be further modified by another rule that also modifies that same characteristic?" But I think we are in agreement overall. The point still stands.
It can go the same way with lance, Lance does not explicity state it changes the av of another special rule. Both special rules are constantly going in a loop because neither one says they trump the other. To break this loop we look at basic vs advance where it tells us if there is a conflict the codex rule trumps, there is the permission for qs to win out vs lance.
mortetvie wrote: By analogy, if you look at a rule that would read "The unit counts its LD as 10 until it fails its first LD test" and another rule that says "When a unit is affected by this attack, treat it's LD as 8 if it is above 8" you would count your LD as 10 for that unit until it is targeted as by the attack that modifies the LD down to 8 for the duration of that attack. Order of Operations would have a unit's LD set to 10 but nowhere in that rule does it say that the LD cannot modified higher or lower any further... Unless it were the Stubborn rule...Since QS does not specify that the AV of 13 CANNOT be further modified by anything else, it CAN be modified further by something else.
Your poor analogy only works if the first rule was only in the BRB and the second rule was in a codex since they are both set values. Lance also does not only work when attacking a target, it is a constant effect. Since Lance does not specify that it trumps other special rules there is conflict.
mortetvie wrote: Think of QS as a flashlight that is always on until a Penetrating hit is suffered and the Lance rule as something that weakens the intensity of the light shining from that flashlight when the flashlight is affected by the Lance rule. Makes simple sense but sometimes simple sense doesn't make sense to some people. That makes no sense.
Real life examples do not work well with game rules and is against the tenets of YMDC. Applying real world scenarios to game rules gets nothing done.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2015/10/29 02:31:44
It's easy to assume that people arguing an interpretation you disagree with are just looking for an advantage for themselves... But it's quite often not the case.
Oberron wrote: It can go the same way with lance, Lance does not explicity state it changes the av of another special rule. Both special rules are constantly going in a loop because neither one says they trump the other. To break this loop we look at basic vs advance where it tells us if there is a conflict the codex rule trumps, there is the permission for qs to win out vs lance
Except it can't and doesn't go the other way as you suggest... You see, QS is the rule that needs to expressly say it cannot be modified by another rule, other rules that innately modify something do not need to expressly say what they can modify because they already do that in and of themselves. Also, as I said before, the Basic vs. Advanced rules do not apply to this situation-that's just a fact based on the plain reading of the Basic vs. Advanced paragraphs. At this point, you guys are arguing against something that, from a purely logical perspective, should be as obvious as 1+1.
Anyway, to reiterate, QS needs to expressly say what, if anything, does not "trump" it otherwise EVERYTHING that modifies AV can modify the value that QS sets the AV at. Again, that's just how the rules work.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2015/10/29 03:21:34
Jesus Christ changed my life, He can do the same for you!
Oberron wrote: It can go the same way with lance, Lance does not explicity state it changes the av of another special rule. Both special rules are constantly going in a loop because neither one says they trump the other. To break this loop we look at basic vs advance where it tells us if there is a conflict the codex rule trumps, there is the permission for qs to win out vs lance
Except it can't and doesn't go the other way as you suggest... You see, QS is the rule that needs to expressly say it cannot be modified by another rule, other rules that innately modify something do not need to expressly say what they can modify because they already do that in and of themselves. Also, as I said before, the Basic vs. Advanced rules do not apply to this situation-that's just a fact based on the plain reading of the Basic vs. Advanced paragraphs. At this point, you guys are arguing against something that, from a purely logical perspective, should be as obvious as 1+1.
Anyway, to reiterate, QS needs to expressly say what, if anything, does not "trump" it otherwise EVERYTHING that modifies AV can modify the value that QS sets the AV at. Again, that's just how the rules work.
Basic vs advance does indeed apply in this situation it talks about what advance rules are and what to do if there is a conflict between a rule in the brb, Lance in this case, and one printed in a codex, qs. Lance does not have permission to change a value on a special rule and neither does QS, since they are both modifiers trying to set a value to something and those modifiers are different it makes a conflict. QS doesn't need to say what does not trump it because it is a special rule and that already tells you what can not trump it. That is how the rules work.
Can you show me a rule that says Lance can modify another special rule and can ignore qs? Can you show me why basic vs advance rule does not apply to a situation that has two constant set modifiers that have different values?
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2015/10/29 04:51:56
It's easy to assume that people arguing an interpretation you disagree with are just looking for an advantage for themselves... But it's quite often not the case.
megatrons2nd wrote:It is an order of operations thing in the sequencing rules. You have stated, that they are always active. The rules are thus, from the point you purchased the model, using these active rules, correct. Now using the sequencing rule that tells you what to do when two different rules tell you to do something at the same time, the player whose turn it is decides what order the rules operate in. There is an order, just because you refuse to acknowledge it does not mean it is not there. I suppose though, since it is a beginning of the game thing you would have to dice off to determine which interpretation is active for the whole game. Yay, another die roll before we can even begin playing!
Now look what you've done. Insert smiley of your choice here.
Or you could apply the rules linearly, and use the sequencing, and have QS go first then lance one turn, and the other way the next.
Sequencing says:
Spoiler:
While playing Warhammer 40,000, you’ll occasionally find that two or more rules are to be resolved at the same time – normally ‘at the start of the Movement phase’ or similar. When this happens, and the wording is not explicit as to which rule is resolved first, then the player whose turn it is chooses the order. If these things occur before or after the game, or at the start or end of a game turn, the players roll-off and the winner decides in what order the rules are resolved in.
Can you demonstrate when Lance Resolves, or QS?
mortetvie wrote:Charistoph, you err in that you are using the dictionary to define certain terms and fail to realize that GW defines for us what they mean by "conflict" and "Basic" or "Advanced" rules.
And where is the definition of conflict in the BRB that makes it different than regular English? A simple example is provided, but it never overrides basic English with it.
mortetvie wrote:The type of conflict that triggers the Basic Versus Advanced rules is one where one rule contradicts another or prevents one from working at all.
If Lance is counting the AV as 12, then QS isn't really counting the AV as 13, is it? It cannot be both at the same time.
mortetvie wrote:Anyway, have fun with how you want to play QS. Too bad you'll never see those rules interpreted as you see them in ANY competitive event. That is, unless you happen to run one yourself and act as head judge but then we probably wouldn't consider that a competitive event .
[sarcasm]Oh, that's right, this is the forum on how I should follow the rules in a tournament! I forgot![/sarcasm]
Tournaments have their own House Rules based on how they feel the game should be played to attract people. I don't usually attend them because of time (and models, really), so someone else's House Rules do not concern me.
mortetvie wrote:
Oberron wrote: It can go the same way with lance, Lance does not explicity state it changes the av of another special rule. Both special rules are constantly going in a loop because neither one says they trump the other. To break this loop we look at basic vs advance where it tells us if there is a conflict the codex rule trumps, there is the permission for qs to win out vs lance
Except it can't and doesn't go the other way as you suggest... You see, QS is the rule that needs to expressly say it cannot be modified by another rule, other rules that innately modify something do not need to expressly say what they can modify because they already do that in and of themselves. Also, as I said before, the Basic vs. Advanced rules do not apply to this situation-that's just a fact based on the plain reading of the Basic vs. Advanced paragraphs. At this point, you guys are arguing against something that, from a purely logical perspective, should be as obvious as 1+1.
Anyway, to reiterate, QS needs to expressly say what, if anything, does not "trump" it otherwise EVERYTHING that modifies AV can modify the value that QS sets the AV at. Again, that's just how the rules work.
Why does it need to specifically state it overrides Lance? Lance is not like Snap Fire or Hard To Hit which apply no matter what without a specific reference to counter. Lance also does not say that it overrides any other modifiers by default.
So, you're only assuming that all these real life standards apply, but almost anything you can say against Quantum Shielding can be said as a counter to Lance as well, because of the rule structure of the game, aside from timing, and we know how much Multiple Modifiers considers timing (or at least you should know by now).
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.
When QS makes the armor value above twelve, then lance lowers that value. Lance cannot take effect at any time before that because the prerequisites for lance aren't met before that.
Lance, as a rule, is always "on" but it isn't always in effect because in order to do so, there are stipulations. QS creates the situation where lance takes effect, therefor the set modifier lance creates occurs after QS. Since the rules allow multiple set modifiers to occur, lance has permission to modify the prior set value.
When QS makes the armor value above twelve, then lance lowers that value. Lance cannot take effect at any time before that because the prerequisites for lance aren't met before that.
Lance, as a rule, is always "on" but it isn't always in effect because in order to do so, there are stipulations. QS creates the situation where lance takes effect, therefor the set modifier lance creates occurs after QS. Since the rules allow multiple set modifiers to occur, lance has permission to modify the prior set value.
When does it happen? What phase/die roll/when X happen does QS and lance resolve from?
It's easy to assume that people arguing an interpretation you disagree with are just looking for an advantage for themselves... But it's quite often not the case.
QS is constant, from the moment it is placed on the tabletop. Lance is constant, from the moment QS is active on a unit. The reason this can occur without causing quantum shielding to be constantly negated is the wording of lance says "weapons with the lance special rule..." Not "if a weapon with the lance special rule is on the table..."
This means that the only time the two rules interact is when a weapon with lance takes aim at a vehicle with QS. The moment that occurs the bonus given by QS gives direct and implicit permission for the lance special rule to THEN ALSO come into effect.
he reason that is true is the set value given by lance does not have permission to affect the base armor value of the vehicle, then quantum shielding sets the vehicles armor value high enough for lance to come into effect. Since the rules allow for set modifierS to be added last, and no permission for any of them (generally) to be applied multiple times, lance therefor changes the bonus for QS.
Lythrandire Biehrellian wrote: QS is constant, from the moment it is placed on the tabletop. Lance is constant, from the moment QS is active on a unit. The reason this can occur without causing quantum shielding to be constantly negated is the wording of lance says "weapons with the lance special rule..." Not "if a weapon with the lance special rule is on the table..."
This means that the only time the two rules interact is when a weapon with lance takes aim at a vehicle with QS. The moment that occurs the bonus given by QS gives direct and implicit permission for the lance special rule to THEN ALSO come into effect.
he reason that is true is the set value given by lance does not have permission to affect the base armor value of the vehicle, then quantum shielding sets the vehicles armor value high enough for lance to come into effect. Since the rules allow for set modifierS to be added last, and no permission for any of them (generally) to be applied multiple times, lance therefor changes the bonus for QS.
Except that neither Lance nor QS ever actually state a point of resolution. You are placing timing from your own perspective, and not from the rules. Reread the example listed in the Sequencing rule. No such phrasing exists for either one.
And even if it did, where does Multiple Modifiers care about sequencing and timing? If MM did care about Sequencing and/or Timing, then there would be less to argue about when it comes to ThunderPuppies carrying Thunder Hammers/Power Fists.
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.
Except the timing listed isn't the only possibilities, just examples of timing.
Lance can only take effect after quantum shielding is already active. You have no rules basis for the position of their only being allowed one set modifier to affect a unit, nor do you have one for a set modifier to be replaced or be allowed to reactivate after another has modified it further.
Lance affects all vehicles with an av above 12, QS causes a vehicle to fall into that category, meaning it causes another set modifier to supersede it after it has taken effect. Since you cannot show that there is a rule disallowing multiple set modifiers to affect a vehicle, and cannot show that quantum shielding has a rule allowing it that privilege, I will leave this argument due to you lacking a rules position to stand on to negate lance doing so.
Sequencing is about timing. And MM doesn't care which comes first.
Lythrandire Biehrellian wrote: Lance can only take effect after quantum shielding is already active. You have no rules basis for the position of their only being allowed one set modifier to affect a unit, nor do you have one for a set modifier to be replaced or be allowed to reactivate after another has modified it further.
No more than you have for the opposite. You have no rules that both set values can be in place at the same time. You have no rules that state if one set value activates because of another Set Value, the activated set value takes precedence or allows it to modify it further. Hence CONFLICT exists.
Lythrandire Biehrellian wrote: Lance affects all vehicles with an av above 12, QS causes a vehicle to fall into that category, meaning it causes another set modifier to supersede it after it has taken effect. Since you cannot show that there is a rule disallowing multiple set modifiers to affect a vehicle, and cannot show that quantum shielding has a rule allowing it that privilege, I will leave this argument due to you lacking a rules position to stand on to negate lance doing so.
You do not have permission to place another set value above another, though. Lance does not provide it. QS does not provide it. MM does not provide it. So a conflict is reached. BvA comes in to play giving precedence to QS over Lance.
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.
megatrons2nd wrote: It is an order of operations thing in the sequencing rules. You have stated, that they are always active. The rules are thus, from the point you purchased the model, using these active rules, correct. Now using the sequencing rule that tells you what to do when two different rules tell you to do something at the same time, the player whose turn it is decides what order the rules operate in. There is an order, just because you refuse to acknowledge it does not mean it is not there. I suppose though, since it is a beginning of the game thing you would have to dice off to determine which interpretation is active for the whole game. Yay, another die roll before we can even begin playing!
Now look what you've done. Insert smiley of your choice here.
Or you could apply the rules linearly, and use the sequencing, and have QS go first then lance one turn, and the other way the next.
Also, a further note. The modifiers rules specifically say no characteristic can be modified above 10 except wounds and attacks, so I guess this is a moot argument because it is an impossible rule to apply. Hey we have to play the RAW right? Sorry the vehicles can go over it natively, but there are no allowed modifiers for it in the rules. RAW QS dos nothing Hazzah!
If you look at vehicle characteristics it says they follow many different rules and their own set of characteristics. Might need to pay attention to the rules a little more. But this is getting off topic.
Methinks you need to read the rules a bit more closely. Yes, vehicles use different characteristics, but no where in the vehicle rules does it say that a modifier can raise a characteristic above 10. So following the modifiers rules, no characteristic can be "modified" to a number greater than 10. Sure a vehicles might have a characteristic above 10 before hand, but there are no allowed modifiers above 10 thus lance makes all vehicles AV 10, even a negative modifier that ends up over 10 will be capped at 10, and QS is a penalty or does nothing because there are no modifiers above 10. Farcical....yes. RAW....Yep. The modifiers rule even includes a trump for special rules, so no matter the source, no characteristic besides Attacks and wounds, my be "modified" above 10. We are all aware that, logically, there should be modifiers for vehicle characteristics above 10, but the rules aren't written that way, and everyone is house ruling it to actually work.
As to off topic, it is about as on topic as looking for a rule to allow you to modify another rule. It doesn't exist, but if you follow the sequencing rule, and the fact that multiple special rules can effect the same model, then you get the answer.
You do not have permission to place another set value above another, though. Lance does not provide it. QS does not provide it. MM does not provide it. So a conflict is reached. BvA comes in to play giving precedence to QS over Lance.
Lance is still an advanced rule, it is listed as a special rule in the appendix, and all special rules beat out basic rules. And if you say QS is advanced, and Lance is not, I should point out that QS is in a "special rule" not "advanced rule" section. So maybe there are no advanced rules.
Man I wish GW would learn how to write rules.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2015/10/29 19:44:34
All the worlds a joke and the people merely punchlines
Mm does indeed provide it due to it not stating "apply a set modifier last" timing does come into play because QS grants permission to lance to come into play and apply a new set modifier by fulfilling the requirements for lance to become active in the situation.
Lance cannot activate before or during quantum shielding because lance only affects things with an av above 12. Quantum shielding gives a unit an av that lance can modify, therefore lance is applied after quantum shielding has already come into effect. You cannot then claim QS gets to override that bonus again because A) you don't have permission to allow a rule to grant its bonus twice without specific permission given and B) lance as a rule would come into effect again, lowering it to twelve due to it gaining a statistical level in the rules that allows lance to affect it.
I do have a rule allowing one set value to override another,believe it or not that rule is the "lance" usr that states it modifies any armor value in the game above 12. It doesn't say "base armor value", it doesn't say "unmodified", it doesn't say "with the exception of quantum shielding" it say ANY armor value above 12.
Basic versus advanced fails because these two rules (despite your insistence otherwise) are not happening simultaneously. One has happened and that causes the other to do so. Where in the rules does it state that the basic universal truth of cause and effect have to be stated plainly for you to be able to follow them in the game? Where does it allow for time loops and non-sequential events in the play area to allow the rules to be interpreted in a way that allows the basic action-reaction laws of reality to be ignored for an in game advantage?
It doesn't. Your argument hold no water so long as humans experience time sequentially and can recognize causality in the world around them. If you can, that is great. Enjoy your omniscience. But the rest of us DO have to follow reality and recognize that each moment in time happens after the moment before, and that if there is an action, there HAS to be a reaction.
megatrons2nd wrote: It is an order of operations thing in the sequencing rules. You have stated, that they are always active. The rules are thus, from the point you purchased the model, using these active rules, correct. Now using the sequencing rule that tells you what to do when two different rules tell you to do something at the same time, the player whose turn it is decides what order the rules operate in. There is an order, just because you refuse to acknowledge it does not mean it is not there. I suppose though, since it is a beginning of the game thing you would have to dice off to determine which interpretation is active for the whole game. Yay, another die roll before we can even begin playing!
Now look what you've done. Insert smiley of your choice here.
Or you could apply the rules linearly, and use the sequencing, and have QS go first then lance one turn, and the other way the next.
Also, a further note. The modifiers rules specifically say no characteristic can be modified above 10 except wounds and attacks, so I guess this is a moot argument because it is an impossible rule to apply. Hey we have to play the RAW right? Sorry the vehicles can go over it natively, but there are no allowed modifiers for it in the rules. RAW QS dos nothing Hazzah!
If you look at vehicle characteristics it says they follow many different rules and their own set of characteristics. Might need to pay attention to the rules a little more. But this is getting off topic.
Methinks you need to read the rules a bit more closely. Yes, vehicles use different characteristics, but no where in the vehicle rules does it say that a modifier can raise a characteristic above 10. So following the modifiers rules, no characteristic can be "modified" to a number greater than 10. Sure a vehicles might have a characteristic above 10 before hand, but there are no allowed modifiers above 10 thus lance makes all vehicles AV 10, even a negative modifier that ends up over 10 will be capped at 10, and QS is a penalty or does nothing because there are no modifiers above 10. Farcical....yes. RAW....Yep. The modifiers rule even includes a trump for special rules, so no matter the source, no characteristic besides Attacks and wounds, my be "modified" above 10. We are all aware that, logically, there should be modifiers for vehicle characteristics above 10, but the rules aren't written that way, and everyone is house ruling it to actually work.
As to off topic, it is about as on topic as looking for a rule to allow you to modify another rule. It doesn't exist, but if you follow the sequencing rule, and the fact that multiple special rules can effect the same model, then you get the answer.
except the AV section in vehicles DOES state that it typically range from 10 to 14. There is the permission. As well as AV is a special rule "advanced rules apply to specific types of models,..... or because they are not normal infantry models (a bike,a swarm, or even a tank" So your assumption is very wrong here. Don't bring this straw-man up again here make another YMDC for it, this is very off topic. As for rules that modify other rules there are plenty of examples.
You do not have permission to place another set value above another, though. Lance does not provide it. QS does not provide it. MM does not provide it. So a conflict is reached. BvA comes in to play giving precedence to QS over Lance.
Lance is still an advanced rule, it is listed as a special rule in the appendix, and all special rules beat out basic rules. And if you say QS is advanced, and Lance is not, I should point out that QS is in a "special rule" not "advanced rule" section. So maybe there are no advanced rules.
Man I wish GW would learn how to write rules.
He never said Lance wasn't an Advanced rule. He said there is no permission to place another set value above another. It is also clearly stated what an advanced rule is on pg 13.
Spoiler:
Lythrandire Biehrellian wrote: Mm does indeed provide it due to it not stating "apply a set modifier last" timing does come into play because QS grants permission to lance to come into play and apply a new set modifier by fulfilling the requirements for lance to become active in the situation.
Lance cannot activate before or during quantum shielding because lance only affects things with an av above 12. Quantum shielding gives a unit an av that lance can modify, therefore lance is applied after quantum shielding has already come into effect. You cannot then claim QS gets to override that bonus again because A) you don't have permission to allow a rule to grant its bonus twice without specific permission given and B) lance as a rule would come into effect again, lowering it to twelve due to it gaining a statistical level in the rules that allows lance to affect it.
I do have a rule allowing one set value to override another,believe it or not that rule is the "lance" usr that states it modifies any armor value in the game above 12. It doesn't say "base armor value", it doesn't say "unmodified", it doesn't say "with the exception of quantum shielding" it say ANY armor value above 12.
Basic versus advanced fails because these two rules (despite your insistence otherwise) are not happening simultaneously. One has happened and that causes the other to do so. Where in the rules does it state that the basic universal truth of cause and effect have to be stated plainly for you to be able to follow them in the game? Where does it allow for time loops and non-sequential events in the play area to allow the rules to be interpreted in a way that allows the basic action-reaction laws of reality to be ignored for an in game advantage?
It doesn't. Your argument hold no water so long as humans experience time sequentially and can recognize causality in the world around them. If you can, that is great. Enjoy your omniscience. But the rest of us DO have to follow reality and recognize that each moment in time happens after the moment before, and that if there is an action, there HAS to be a reaction.
You even agreed that both special rules are constant so how are you still arguing for the use of sequencing when that rule is only talking about when rules resolve? Lance is constantly active just like QS. Lance does NOT say any like you claim it does "Weapons with the Lance special rule count vehicle Armour Values that are higher than 12 as 12." That is all Lance says and there is no PERMISSION for it to override another special rule.
Basic vs advance doesn't fail because like you have agreed with they are both constant. Neither of them 'happen' just one time, they are both constantly going on. They both 'see' each other take place..... constantly. The rules are abstractions and real world rules DO NOT APPLY to them. Tenet 3 of YMDC
3. Never, ever bring real-world examples into a rules argument.
- The rules, while creating a very rough approximation of the real world, are an abstraction of a fantasy universe. Real world examples have no bearing on how the rules work. So quit it.
The only cause and effect rules that take place in the game are listed in their rules like "when X happens do Y" and the like just like the rules in sequencing.
You post
Spoiler:
Lythrandire Biehrellian wrote: QS is constant, from the moment it is placed on the tabletop. Lance is constant, from the moment QS is active on a unit. The reason this can occur without causing quantum shielding to be constantly negated is the wording of lance says "weapons with the lance special rule..." Not "if a weapon with the lance special rule is on the table..."
This means that the only time the two rules interact is when a weapon with lance takes aim at a vehicle with QS. The moment that occurs the bonus given by QS gives direct and implicit permission for the lance special rule to THEN ALSO come into effect.
he reason that is true is the set value given by lance does not have permission to affect the base armor value of the vehicle, then quantum shielding sets the vehicles armor value high enough for lance to come into effect. Since the rules allow for set modifierS to be added last, and no permission for any of them (generally) to be applied multiple times, lance therefor changes the bonus for QS.
contradicts it self multiple times with no rules support.
You admit they are both constant and apply the moment they are on the table [
QS is constant, from the moment it is placed on the tabletop.Lance is constant, from the moment QS is active on a unit. The reason this can occur without causing quantum shielding to be constantly negated is the wording of lance says "weapons with the lance special rule..." Not "if a weapon with the lance special rule is on the table..."
You say that QS is constant when the model is on the table yet Lance needs to specifically say it has to be on the table in order for it to work the exact same way? No that doesn't work like that. If a model that has a weapon with Lance is on the table it is active regardless if there is any vehicles on the table or not.However it is only useful against vehicles with an av higher than 12 without any special situations involved.
This message was edited 3 times. Last update was at 2015/10/29 21:56:26
It's easy to assume that people arguing an interpretation you disagree with are just looking for an advantage for themselves... But it's quite often not the case.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2015/10/29 21:54:04
It's easy to assume that people arguing an interpretation you disagree with are just looking for an advantage for themselves... But it's quite often not the case.
Oberron wrote: except the AV section in vehicles DOES state that it typically range from 10 to 14. There is the permission. As well as AV is a special rule "advanced rules apply to specific types of models,..... or because they are not normal infantry models (a bike,a swarm, or even a tank" So your assumption is very wrong here. Don't bring this straw-man up again here make another YMDC for it, this is very off topic. As for rules that modify other rules there are plenty of examples.
Note that it is base statistics that are going over 10. Do you see a modifier anywhere in that? I don't. Where is the permission to have a modifier with a value greater than 10 ? Same argument for multiple set modifiers. There is no rule for it, so logic must be applied for the rules to function.
All the worlds a joke and the people merely punchlines
You do not have permission to place another set value above another, though. Lance does not provide it. QS does not provide it. MM does not provide it. So a conflict is reached. BvA comes in to play giving precedence to QS over Lance.
Lance is still an advanced rule, it is listed as a special rule in the appendix, and all special rules beat out basic rules. And if you say QS is advanced, and Lance is not, I should point out that QS is in a "special rule" not "advanced rule" section. So maybe there are no advanced rules.
???
Yes, Lance is still an advanced rule (and in the Special Rules section of the BRB), where have I stated otherwise? In fact, when referencing Basic vs Advanced I point out the part where codex advanced rules trump BRB advanced rules, which would imply that Lance is the BRBadvanced rule in the discussion. Quantum Shielding is an advanced rule from a codex by the same paragraph that defines Lance as an advanced rule. But I don't see where Lance is given permission to override another set value modifier, especially as most other modifiers ARE advanced rules as well.
megatrons2nd wrote:Man I wish GW would learn how to write rules.
On that, you will find agreement from this one. Between that and Dakka, it keeps prompting me to sell off everything from GW and put it in Firestorm and Battletech (again), with a little bit in Privateer Press.
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.
Lance is constant, it just only takes effect in certain situations. Quantum shielding provides it the ability to take effect. Lance then applies a set modifier to the unit that has a set modifier due to quantum shielding. Because there is nothing saying a set modifier cannot override a set modifier, and there is permission for multiple set modifiers to affect a unit in the game, lance is allowed to interact directly with a set modifier that allows it to function.
Let me go ahead and point to where my point was made for me in oberron's post above
"Lance is only use full against vehicles with an armor value higher than twelve." Where you are wrong is where YOU decided that it is only "without any special situations involved" where does it say lance cannot affect a modifier that is already in place? Where does it say only one set modifier can be applied to a unit in any statistic? It doesn't, anywhere.
Lance has permission to affect any vehicle with an av higher than twelve. Fact
A vehicle with quantum shielding has an av higher than twelve. Fact
There are no rules stating that a UNIT cannot be affected by multiple set modifiers. Fact
There are no general rules, or specific rules for quantum shielding that allow it to ignore lance or be applied more than once. Fact
Lance has permission to affect units with quantum shielding due to the rules allowing multiple set modifiers affect a unit and the unit with quantum shielding causing the unit itself to become a viable application for the lance rule to affect. When lance comes into play (whenever that may be) it will automatically count any vehicle with av>12 as 12. Since the model with QS counts as (for ALL intents and purposes because there is NO stipulation within the rule itself that says otherwise) av13 it automatically becomes affected by lance.
Lance wins out over quantum shielding.
You have no basis for your interpretation of the rules for sequencing because you are resting it on your own assumption that only one set modifier can be applied to anything and one has to override the other in all ways. That isn't true.
Lythrandire Biehrellian wrote: Lance is constant, it just only takes effect in certain situations. Quantum shielding provides it the ability to take effect. Lance then applies a set modifier to the unit that has a set modifier due to quantum shielding. Because there is nothing saying a set modifier cannot override a set modifier, and there is permission for multiple set modifiers to affect a unit in the game, lance is allowed to interact directly with a set modifier that allows it to function.
Let me go ahead and point to where my point was made for me in oberron's post above
"Lance is only use full against vehicles with an armor value higher than twelve." Where you are wrong is where YOU decided that it is only "without any special situations involved" where does it say lance cannot affect a modifier that is already in place? Where does it say only one set modifier can be applied to a unit in any statistic? It doesn't, anywhere.
Lance has permission to affect any vehicle with an av higher than twelve. Fact
A vehicle with quantum shielding has an av higher than twelve. Fact
There are no rules stating that a UNIT cannot be affected by multiple set modifiers. Fact
There are no general rules, or specific rules for quantum shielding that allow it to ignore lance or be applied more than once. Fact
Lance has permission to affect units with quantum shielding due to the rules allowing multiple set modifiers affect a unit and the unit with quantum shielding causing the unit itself to become a viable application for the lance rule to affect. When lance comes into play (whenever that may be) it will automatically count any vehicle with av>12 as 12. Since the model with QS counts as (for ALL intents and purposes because there is NO stipulation within the rule itself that says otherwise) av13 it automatically becomes affected by lance.
Lance wins out over quantum shielding.
You have no basis for your interpretation of the rules for sequencing because you are resting it on your own assumption that only one set modifier can be applied to anything and one has to override the other in all ways. That isn't true.
Do you think a constant rule applies only once or is a constant effect that is going on constantly?
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2015/10/30 02:55:20
It's easy to assume that people arguing an interpretation you disagree with are just looking for an advantage for themselves... But it's quite often not the case.