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.

 Hivefleet Oblivion wrote:
I would say this is like my getting the shopping. The g/f says "buy all the items on last week's shopping list". On the shopping list, it also says, "don't wear your old blue jeans, wear your red tutu." I am wearing black jeans and I don't fancy the red tutu tonight. the shopping list might also have other conditions, like a maximum spend I'm allowed. But if I've been told explicity to buy the items on the list, I obey the list - not the instructions, all the more so when obeying the instructions would give a meaningless outcome.

That's a very misleading example where you are not punished for disobeying the rule of "wear your frigging tutu". Let's try that again:

Your GF tells you "You may bring me ice cream from the supermarket". First of all you can either go to the supermarket or challenge the dragon by staying home.
You run to the supermarket, which has a rather annoying "You only get ice cream (and other dairy products) in exchange for money" policy. If you simply take the ice cream without paying, you're breaking the rules. A random cop already noticed you being shady af next to the ice cream. Since you don't have any money on you, you have to return empty-handed and face the wrath of your girlfriend.

TL;DR: You can't just decide to ignore a written rule just because it's inconvenient to you.

 Hivefleet Oblivion wrote:

 DeathReaper wrote:


What doe the Boss nob need in order to take items from the Melee weapons list?

Does he have one?

he needs an instruction to take one, which is provided on page 65.

He also needs a Melee weapon.

 Hivefleet Oblivion wrote:

Another instruction sits under the heading Melee Weapons but it is irrelevant in this instance. It is not a specified condition. It is not an item on the list.

False. you need a Melee weapon to trade for a different melee weapon and clearly he does not have one.


Lets look at the actual rules from the Ork Codex:

1) "The Boss Nob may take items from the Melee Weapons list."
and
2) "A model may replace its melee weapon with one of the following:"

#1 tells him that he is allowed to access that list.

#2 tells him what he needs to do to get a weapon from that list...

If he does not have a melee weapon, he can not " replace its melee weapon with one of the following:" and as such is breaking the rules.

Does anyone as sent a mail to GW about this point?

They're working on FAQ, it may time to see what they think about this point beacause I think we may never agree on this point and both side can play with words as they want to confort their positions.

Another approach: did any of you play Orks in a tournament? And as the referees authorize a list with a tank busta nob with PK ?

On my side, in the 3 or 4 different tournaments I do this year: the PK on a boss tank busta was allowed.

O I git it.

He takes a weapon from the list

He takes it

Takes

Like taking a powerklaw from a baby. The entry gives you permission to ignore the melee weapon list rule and you simply just take it. Like any true ork would. Punch that no good weapon dealing grot right in the mouth and acquire powerklaw.

Just take it

Yeah exactly... "The Boss Nob may take items from the Melee Weapons list."

Doesn't say you have to pay for it right? Let's just ignore all the instructions about how to purchase items in the list and take whatever items we want without paying for them because that's what we're told to do.

/sarcasm

But nonetheless, this points out the logical fallacy in ignoring the "A model may replace its melee weapon with one of the following:". If you're going to ignore that, then you might as well ignore the points cost too.

There is then no point in the saying he can take a melee weapon from the list then if he doesn't count as having a close combat weapon. Some say you can equip him with a tankhammer, but Boss Nobs can't take tankhammers, only tankbustas. The same would be for my wolf guard pack leader and my scouts. Scouts can take camo cloaks, but a wolf guard pack leader does not access to them and therefore cannot be equipped with one. Therefore with the argument of the Boss Nob not having a weapon to trade he can't ever access the list despite it saying so in the codex entry.

biggie_reg wrote:
There is then no point in the saying he can take a melee weapon from the list then if he doesn't count as having a close combat weapon.

However saying that he can take a melee weapon doesn't override the requirement in the Melee Weapon list.

This is one of those cases where rules and intent have gone in opposite directions.

Does this really need a debate?
GW doesn't write good rules, RaW says one thing but one look at the codex and the intent is crystal. Would anyone seriously challenge this in an actual game?

GW have kicked Ork players with enough bad rules. Move along..

 grendel083 wrote:
This is one of those cases where rules and intent have gone in opposite directions.

Does this really need a debate?
GW doesn't write good rules, RaW says one thing but one look at the codex and the intent is crystal. Would anyone seriously challenge this in an actual game?

GW have kicked Ork players with enough bad rules. Move along..

Is the intent 'crystal clear'? Was the fact that he has no melee weapon to trade the error or is the option to take an item from the Melee Weapon list the error?

 Ghaz wrote:
Is the intent 'crystal clear'?

Looking at my codex right now, yes it is.

Now I'm not arguing RaW, but intent.
The Tankbusta Boss Nob is listed as being able to take a melee weapon.
This isn't a generic Boss Nob entry, but one specifically tailored for the Tankbusta entry (enhanced edition codex).

Quite simply, they wouldn't say he can take one, if he isn't intended to take one.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
It's Wednesday night, you've got your best bud coming round for a friendly game.
You've taken 3 Riptides and enough daft rules to fill 3 novels (very friendly). Your poor friend is bringing Orks, you've even made him pay for the beers. Thanks to GWs idea of "balance" and and poor rules writing, this game is only going one way and you both know it..

His (one and only) mob of Tankbustas has a Boss Nob with a Klaw. Looking at the codex, you see his entry:



Now are you going to seriously say "Nope, that's not right. RaW says..."?

With GW's track record? No, the intent is not clear. As I've stated, its a toss up if the error is the lack of a weapon to trade or the permission to take items from the Melee Weapons list.

Everybody! I have fixed it!

Turn your Ork Codex to page 93 and you will clearly find the melee weapon list! There on that page your Boss Nob will find a choppa in the melee weapon list that GW is inspecific about.

Yes! Take one! Take two! Swap them for power klaws!

 Rismonite wrote:
Everybody! I have fixed it!

Turn your Ork Codex to page 93 and you will clearly find the melee weapon list! There on that page your Boss Nob will find a choppa in the melee weapon list that GW is inspecific about.

Yes! Take one! Take two! Swap them for power klaws!

My digital edition does not have page numbers.

Care to be more specific where I can find the information?

Under Ork Wargear list I see this:

Melee Weapons
A model may replace its melee weapon with one of the following:
- Big choppa…(A number of) pts
- Power klaw…(A number of) pts

and that is it. nothing about a choppa...

there is a separate list on page 93 that specifies the strength of Choppas and Big Choppa etc. No points costs.

It's a second Melee weapons list in effect and list the Choppa as S user, type Melee.

 Hivefleet Oblivion wrote:
there is a separate list on page 93 that specifies the strength of Choppas and Big Choppa etc. No points costs.

It's a second Melee weapons list in effect and list the Choppa as S user, type Melee.

Except that is not the Melee Weapons list.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
The only way I can see this working, is if you upgrade a Tankbusta to have a Tankhammer, upgrade the same Tankbusta to be a Nob, and then trade the hammer for a melee weapon.

And before anyone jumps on me about the Nob having a hammer when it is an option for Tankbustas, I'm staying consistent with the belief that upgrades are taken in the order listed on the datasheet.

 Hivefleet Oblivion wrote:
there is a separate list on page 93 that specifies the strength of Choppas and Big Choppa etc. No points costs.

It's a second Melee weapons list in effect and list the Choppa as S user, type Melee.

That has the weapon descriptions yes, but that is not the melee weapons list.

 DeathReaper wrote:

 Hivefleet Oblivion wrote:
there is a separate list on page 93 that specifies the strength of Choppas and Big Choppa etc. No points costs.

It's a second Melee weapons list in effect and list the Choppa as S user, type Melee.

That has the weapon descriptions yes, but that is not the melee weapons list.

It says Melee Weapons and is a list just like on the page before the warboss says Melee Weapons and is a list.

Yes I am being difficult deliberately.

RAW, yeah okay guys we know

RAI obviously meant to pay 25 points and get a klaw like every nob entry in the book k?

Comon ork faq, I need your rules to build my tankbusta nob inefficiently.

 Rismonite wrote:

 DeathReaper wrote:

 Hivefleet Oblivion wrote:
there is a separate list on page 93 that specifies the strength of Choppas and Big Choppa etc. No points costs.

It's a second Melee weapons list in effect and list the Choppa as S user, type Melee.

That has the weapon descriptions yes, but that is not the melee weapons list.

It says Melee Weapons and is a list just like on the page before the warboss says Melee Weapons and is a list.

Yes I am being difficult deliberately.

RAW, yeah okay guys we know

RAI obviously meant to pay 25 points and get a klaw like every nob entry in the book k?

Comon ork faq, I need your rules to build my tankbusta nob inefficiently.

If you're talking RAI / HIWPI please state that you do, otherwise everyone assumes you're arguing RAW. It wasn't indicated by anyone from the "can take klaw" camp that we've switched to RAI territory. And Oblivion for sure looks like he's still arguing RAW.

nekooni wrote:

 Rismonite wrote:

 DeathReaper wrote:

 Hivefleet Oblivion wrote:
there is a separate list on page 93 that specifies the strength of Choppas and Big Choppa etc. No points costs.

It's a second Melee weapons list in effect and list the Choppa as S user, type Melee.

That has the weapon descriptions yes, but that is not the melee weapons list.

It says Melee Weapons and is a list just like on the page before the warboss says Melee Weapons and is a list.

Yes I am being difficult deliberately.

RAW, yeah okay guys we know

RAI obviously meant to pay 25 points and get a klaw like every nob entry in the book k?

Comon ork faq, I need your rules to build my tankbusta nob inefficiently.

If you're talking RAI / HIWPI please state that you do, otherwise everyone assumes you're arguing RAW. It wasn't indicated by anyone from the "can take klaw" camp that we've switched to RAI territory. And Oblivion for sure looks like he's still arguing RAW.

Oh yeah RAW yeah goto the weapon list on pg 93 and acquire choppa.

Then, I goto the other weapon list, and exchange my newly acquired choppa for a power klaw for 25 points.

RAW correct

 Rismonite wrote:

nekooni wrote:

 Rismonite wrote:

 DeathReaper wrote:

 Hivefleet Oblivion wrote:
there is a separate list on page 93 that specifies the strength of Choppas and Big Choppa etc. No points costs.

It's a second Melee weapons list in effect and list the Choppa as S user, type Melee.

That has the weapon descriptions yes, but that is not the melee weapons list.

It says Melee Weapons and is a list just like on the page before the warboss says Melee Weapons and is a list.

Yes I am being difficult deliberately.

RAW, yeah okay guys we know

RAI obviously meant to pay 25 points and get a klaw like every nob entry in the book k?

Comon ork faq, I need your rules to build my tankbusta nob inefficiently.

If you're talking RAI / HIWPI please state that you do, otherwise everyone assumes you're arguing RAW. It wasn't indicated by anyone from the "can take klaw" camp that we've switched to RAI territory. And Oblivion for sure looks like he's still arguing RAW.

Oh yeah RAW yeah goto the weapon list on pg 93 and acquire choppa.

Then, I goto the other weapon list, and exchange my newly acquired choppa for a power klaw for 25 points.

RAW correct

Sure. Why don't you just aquire twin Killsaws?

nekooni wrote:

 Rismonite wrote:

nekooni wrote:

 Rismonite wrote:

 DeathReaper wrote:

 Hivefleet Oblivion wrote:
there is a separate list on page 93 that specifies the strength of Choppas and Big Choppa etc. No points costs.

It's a second Melee weapons list in effect and list the Choppa as S user, type Melee.

That has the weapon descriptions yes, but that is not the melee weapons list.

It says Melee Weapons and is a list just like on the page before the warboss says Melee Weapons and is a list.

Yes I am being difficult deliberately.

RAW, yeah okay guys we know

RAI obviously meant to pay 25 points and get a klaw like every nob entry in the book k?

Comon ork faq, I need your rules to build my tankbusta nob inefficiently.

If you're talking RAI / HIWPI please state that you do, otherwise everyone assumes you're arguing RAW. It wasn't indicated by anyone from the "can take klaw" camp that we've switched to RAI territory. And Oblivion for sure looks like he's still arguing RAW.

Oh yeah RAW yeah goto the weapon list on pg 93 and acquire choppa.

Then, I goto the other weapon list, and exchange my newly acquired choppa for a power klaw for 25 points.

RAW correct

Sure. Why don't you just aquire twin Killsaws?

Great idea! lol

RAW is soo fun

EDIT

They better faq this, or all ork Nobz are definately gonna win the next major tourney dual wielding two free powerklaws

(Is it sad that I think every nob could be dual wielding two free powerklaws and orkz still not win a tournie?)

Double edit, I guess I'll stop I fear I am making others angry. My apologies

 Rismonite wrote:

nekooni wrote:

 Rismonite wrote:

nekooni wrote:

 Rismonite wrote:

 DeathReaper wrote:

 Hivefleet Oblivion wrote:
there is a separate list on page 93 that specifies the strength of Choppas and Big Choppa etc. No points costs.

It's a second Melee weapons list in effect and list the Choppa as S user, type Melee.

That has the weapon descriptions yes, but that is not the melee weapons list.

It says Melee Weapons and is a list just like on the page before the warboss says Melee Weapons and is a list.

Yes I am being difficult deliberately.

RAW, yeah okay guys we know

RAI obviously meant to pay 25 points and get a klaw like every nob entry in the book k?

Comon ork faq, I need your rules to build my tankbusta nob inefficiently.

If you're talking RAI / HIWPI please state that you do, otherwise everyone assumes you're arguing RAW. It wasn't indicated by anyone from the "can take klaw" camp that we've switched to RAI territory. And Oblivion for sure looks like he's still arguing RAW.

Oh yeah RAW yeah goto the weapon list on pg 93 and acquire choppa.

Then, I goto the other weapon list, and exchange my newly acquired choppa for a power klaw for 25 points.

RAW correct

Sure. Why don't you just aquire twin Killsaws?

Great idea! lol

RAW is soo fun

Oh, but I thought we were ignoring restrictions and just bullshiting around, because the rules as written say otherwise.
You need to have permission to do anything in 40k.

nekooni wrote:



Sure. Why don't you just acquire twin Killsaws?

No-one's arguing that, so to suggest this seems to be just wasting time. The point about the second Melee list is that it defines the free choppa. There is no points cost in the second Melee Weapons list and it only really has relevance in that respect. There is only a points cost in the First Melee Weapons list - the list that also contains an instruction that you believe is "part" of the list, and that I contend is only an "instruction" (which explicitly contradicts the instruction which refers us to this list) and is not an item on the list.

I contend RAW is clear - but that we are both in essence arguing RAI regarding that second instruction, and indeed we can only argue RAI because there are clearly two contradictory statements if we take the second instruction as RAW.

I think we've all established our arguments. It would of course be fascinating if anyone has access to the iBook Ork Codex - which if memory serves has a basic Army Builder function and might allow this build. I wonder if it's as packed with errors as the print version.

.

 Hivefleet Oblivion wrote:

nekooni wrote:



Sure. Why don't you just acquire twin Killsaws?

No-one's arguing that, so to suggest this seems to be just wasting time. The point about the second Melee list is that it defines the free choppa. There is no points cost in the second Melee Weapons list and it only really has relevance in that respect. There is only a points cost in the First Melee Weapons list - the list that also contains an instruction that you believe is "part" of the list, and that I contend is only an "instruction" (which explicitly contradicts the instruction which refers us to this list) and is not an item on the list.

I contend RAW is clear - but that we are both in essence arguing RAI regarding that second instruction, and indeed we can only argue RAI because there are clearly two contradictory statements if we take the second instruction as RAW.

I think we've all established our arguments. It would of course be fascinating if anyone has access to the iBook Ork Codex - which if memory serves has a basic Army Builder function and might allow this build. I wonder if it's as packed with errors as the print version.

.

Why AREN'T you arguing that your Nob can take 2 Killsaws? it's in the list you claim is a valid source of items for you. It's plain ridiculous that you consider this list in the first place, and then go on to simply ignore instructions which clearly limit the list you're supposed to use.
If I follow your logic there is no problem with a Nob with 2 Killsaws or any other kind of Melee weapon documented in the Ork codex. That should be an indicator as to of how viable your argument is.

Hivefleet - so given you feel you can ignore rules, why arent you ginoring the points costs as well? That would at least be consistent.

nosferatu1001 wrote:
Hivefleet - so given you feel you can ignore rules, why arent you ginoring the points costs as well? That would at least be consistent.

Why are you asking people to repeat themselves?

I've explained the difference between an item on a specified list, and an instruction (which is not part of that list). You can disagree with that, and that is your prerogative. You dislike my interpretation, fine; I disagree with yours, which in any case lands you in a logical impasse.

it's interesting how sometimes these issues become ts emotive, with arguments like "you feel you can ignore rules" [which is a way of avoiding genuine debate about the meaning of terms]. Meanwhile, the meaning of many terms and instructions isn't even discussed - as, for instance, the clear facility for the Nob to take a Tankhammer, which he can then, even with your instruction on the list, exchange - albeit for a points premium.

Hey its 2 contradicting rules:

He can take one...

He can't take one....

So they cancel each other out! haha

Seriously though replacing can also mean putting something where nothing was there before. It doesn't actually mean that it is cancelled if there was nothing there.

Also, his entry clearly bypasses the restriction.

 Hivefleet Oblivion wrote:

nosferatu1001 wrote:
Hivefleet - so given you feel you can ignore rules, why arent you ginoring the points costs as well? That would at least be consistent.

Why are you asking people to repeat themselves?

I've explained the difference between an item on a specified list, and an instruction (which is not part of that list). You can disagree with that, and that is your prerogative. You dislike my interpretation, fine; I disagree with yours, which in any case lands you in a logical impasse.

it's interesting how sometimes these issues become ts emotive, with arguments like "you feel you can ignore rules" [which is a way of avoiding genuine debate about the meaning of terms]. Meanwhile, the meaning of many terms and instructions isn't even discussed - as, for instance, the clear facility for the Nob to take a Tankhammer, which he can then, even with your instruction on the list, exchange - albeit for a points premium.

But your argument is literally that you can ignore the "Instruction" on the Melee Weapon List. You simply can't just choose to ignore this, like I explained much earlier with a more concise example - multiple times, one with your shopping example and one with the Space Marine Standards - which you conveniently missed apparently.

Discussion can only happen when both sides actually pick up the other sides arguments and not just repeat their own statement.

 chaosmarauder wrote:
Hey its 2 contradicting rules:

He can take one...

He can't take one....

So they cancel each other out! haha

Roll each turn to find out if he has it that turn. On a 4+, he's got it!

 Hivefleet Oblivion wrote:

nosferatu1001 wrote:
Hivefleet - so given you feel you can ignore rules, why arent you ginoring the points costs as well? That would at least be consistent.

Why are you asking people to repeat themselves?

I've explained the difference between an item on a specified list, and an instruction (which is not part of that list). You can disagree with that, and that is your prerogative. You dislike my interpretation, fine; I disagree with yours, which in any case lands you in a logical impasse.

it's interesting how sometimes these issues become ts emotive, with arguments like "you feel you can ignore rules" [which is a way of avoiding genuine debate about the meaning of terms]. Meanwhile, the meaning of many terms and instructions isn't even discussed - as, for instance, the clear facility for the Nob to take a Tankhammer, which he can then, even with your instruction on the list, exchange - albeit for a points premium.

Yes, and I've explained that one is permission to access the lsit, and the other is instructions on how to actually take items from that list. Which includes the requirement to swap a weapon, and pay points.

Givne you are ignoring the requirement to swap a weapon, you may as well ignore the points cost as well.

It isnt a logicl impasse: you literally have no credible argument here. Nothing.