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.

Ceann wrote:


"During a turn in which a unit equipped with rad grenades
launches an assault, or is assaulted the enemy unit(s)
suffer a -1 penalty to their toughness until the end of phase"

In that quote . . .

turn, grenades, assault, enemy, unit(s), toughness, and phase are all 40k defined terms.

If you are using the 40k definition for 'turn' then you need to also use the 40k definition for 'grenade'.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Ceann wrote:
Dear dear col.
Is the codex providing a conflict for those? I don't see any of those words in the codex, you are right sir.

Good thing there is no conflict. Per the rules of the BRB we will follow the basic rules of the BRB because their is no conflict with those words where the codex takes precedence.

Page 13 BRB. Basic vs advanced.

Same thing for grenade. There is no conflict so the BRB definition of grenade applies.

 Brother Ramses wrote:

col_impact wrote:
EMPYREAN BRAIN MINES
Empyrean brain mines are used at the start of the Fight sub-phase. Nominate one enemy model in base contact with the bearer. That model must pass an Initiative test to avoid the brain mine. If the test is passed, the effects of the brain mine have been resisted. If the test is failed, the victim has been rendered momentarily catatonic and cannot strike any blows during this sub-phase.


So here we are in the codex.

What's the 'Fight sub-phase'?

What's a 'model'.

What's an 'Initiative test'?

There aren't any page references to the BRB so according to Ceann and Brother Ramses those are meaningless words with no impact on anything. Looks like Empyrean Brain Mines do absolutely nothing.




Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Brother Ramses wrote:


Look everyone, it is the same col_impact tactic from the RG relic and terminator/bike thread! Repeat his LIE enough times for him to believe it. And I am saying LIE because you have zero standing at all to make the premise that you have and the RAW is clear cut as can possibly be. You are propagating a lie and are going to repeat it over and over on the premise that it is true without a single written rule to backup your stance.

What lie? That 'grenades' is an indexed keyword? Are you able to open up your BRB and read it? You can confirm that 'grenades' is an indexed keyword all by yourself.

Are you told to reference the rules for grenades in the wargear entry for Rad Grenades or are you assuming that you reference the rules for Rad Grenades because "grenades" is in the name? If you are choosing the latter, cite your rules reference that tells you to use a naming convention and index to refer to the grenades section of the BRB. Remember, you need explicit permission, not assumption to reference the rules for grenades in the BRB. Until you can do that, your premise is based on a lie that you have created on a whim to support your argument.

Friend Brother Ramses!

Never fear! The rad grenades are located in the special wargear section of the IA codex. This means that rad grenades are not a weapon, as they are not a weapon they have no need to reference any weapon rules. Just like any other special wargear, like an omnispex. In order for Mr Denier to even being to have a fractal theory sized argument he would have to demonstrate that they are a weapon, but they are not they are a special wargear.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
So a heavy flamer is a heavy weapon right Col?
Because we see the word heavy?

No.

Items are CLASSIFIED under the section they sit in, a grenade is in the weapons section, being a weapon and follow the rules for weapons.

Weapons are listed in the weapons section and follow the rules for weapon profiles.

We do not have a weapon we have a special wargear.

 Brother Ramses wrote:

col_impact wrote:
EMPYREAN BRAIN MINES
Empyrean brain mines are used at the start of the Fight sub-phase. Nominate one enemy model in base contact with the bearer. That model must pass an Initiative test to avoid the brain mine. If the test is passed, the effects of the brain mine have been resisted. If the test is failed, the victim has been rendered momentarily catatonic and cannot strike any blows during this sub-phase.


So here we are in the codex.

What's the 'Fight sub-phase'?

What's a 'model'.

What's an 'Initiative test'?

There aren't any page references to the BRB so according to Ceann and Brother Ramses those are meaningless words with no impact on anything. Looks like Empyrean Brain Mines do absolutely nothing.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Brother Ramses wrote:


Look everyone, it is the same col_impact tactic from the RG relic and terminator/bike thread! Repeat his LIE enough times for him to believe it. And I am saying LIE because you have zero standing at all to make the premise that you have and the RAW is clear cut as can possibly be. You are propagating a lie and are going to repeat it over and over on the premise that it is true without a single written rule to backup your stance.

What lie? That 'grenades' is an indexed keyword? Are you able to open up your BRB and read it? You can confirm that 'grenades' is an indexed keyword all by yourself.

Are you told to reference the rules for grenades in the wargear entry for Rad Grenades or are you assuming that you reference the rules for Rad Grenades because "grenades" is in the name? If you are choosing the latter, cite your rules reference that tells you to use a naming convention and index to refer to the grenades section of the BRB. Remember, you need explicit permission, not assumption to reference the rules for grenades in the BRB. Until you can do that, your premise is based on a lie that you have created on a whim to support your argument.

They are referred to as Rad grenades with grenades in the lower case. Therefore grenades is not part of the name. Therefore the 40k definition of grenades applies.

Wrong again Col.

It's like Try again Bragg, but the opposite.

Grenades are defined as a WEAPON in the weapons section.
Rad Grenades are not a weapon, they are a special wargear.

Do you see a section in the BRB for special wargear?
No?
None at all?

Then I guess we follow the rules in the codex.
Codex wins again.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Ramses you think we can discuss rad grenades now before he cooks up something new?

Ceann wrote:
Wrong again Col.

It's like Try again Bragg, but the opposite.

Grenades are defined as a WEAPON in the weapons section.
Rad Grenades are not a weapon, they are a special wargear.

Do you see a section in the BRB for special wargear?
No?
None at all?

Then I guess we follow the rules in the codex.
Codex wins again.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Ramses you think we can discuss rad grenades now before he cooks up something new?

Frag grenades are special issue wargear in C:SM. Are you saying that Frag grenades are not grenades or weapons?




I have proven that Special Issue Wargear can include weapons and can include grenades.

And since 'Rad grenades' uses 'grenades' in lower case we know that 'grenades' is not part of the name. So the 40k definition of 'grenades' applies.

And the relationship of the Codex:SM to the BRB has nothing to with the relationship of Codex:IA to the BRB.

Rad Grenades are never declared as a weapon, they are a special issue wargear.
Codex supersedes the BRB.
You ask how Frag Grenades work, well the data sheet for the units is what you are told in the BRB to look at in the Codex.
Is there a conflict with Frag Grenades in the Codex:SM? No?

Maybe you should stop going off topic.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Is there a self help section?
Every time you start posting you have all of these questions about how the rules work and need to have them explained to you. I think you should read the rules and come back when you ready.

Ceann wrote:
And the relationship of the Codex:SM to the BRB has nothing to with the relationship of Codex:IA to the BRB.

Rad Grenades are never declared as a weapon, they are a special issue wargear.
Codex supersedes the BRB.
You ask how Frag Grenades work, well the data sheet for the units is what you are told in the BRB to look at in the Codex.
Is there a conflict with Frag Grenades in the Codex:SM? No?

Maybe you should stop going off topic.

It's 'rad grenade' not 'Rad Grenade'. 'Grenade' is not part of some named proper noun. Therefore you must use the rules for 40k defined term 'grenade'. In the Grenade section you will find that Unusual Grenades fits what a rad grenade is.

What do Rad grenades do Col?


Automatically Appended Next Post:
I am on page 180 of the BRB.

I see Assault Grenades
Plasma Grenades
Defensive Grenades
Haywire Grenades
Krak Grenades
Melta bombs.

What is a rad grenade col? They don't exist.

Ceann wrote:
What do Rad grandes do Col?

rad grenades are grenades. More specifically they are Unusual Grenades since they lack a profile and fit the specific definition of Unusual Grenade.




rad grenades have a special rule



the wording of that special rule is not cumulative

Where did you find this Col????

During a turn in which a unit equipped with rad grenades launches an assault, or is assaulted, the enemy unit(s) suffer a -1 penalty to their Toughness until the end of the phase (this does affect the victims’ Instant Death threshold).

I am looking at page 180 of the BRB.
Grenades of the Imperium
I see Assault Grenades
Plasma Grenades
Defensive Grenades
Haywire Grenades
Krak Grenades
Melta bombs.

What is a rad grenade col? They don't exist.

Ceann wrote:
Where did you find this Col????

During a turn in which a unit equipped with rad grenades launches an assault, or is assaulted, the enemy unit(s) suffer a -1 penalty to their Toughness until the end of the phase (this does affect the victims’ Instant Death threshold).

I am looking at page 180 of the BRB.
Grenades of the Imperium
I see Assault Grenades
Plasma Grenades
Defensive Grenades
Haywire Grenades
Krak Grenades
Melta bombs.

What is a rad grenade col? They don't exist.

Not all grenades in 40k are listed in the BRB. A rad grenade is a grenade. It's an Unusual Grenade. It has a special rule ("During a turn in which a unit equipped with rad grenades launches an assault, or is assaulted, the enemy unit(s) suffer a -1 penalty to their Toughness until the end of the phase (this does affect the victims’ Instant Death threshold).") The wording of the special rule is not cumulative.

Where did you find the rules for a rad grenades col?
A rad grenade does not exist in the BRB.
Where can I locate them?

Ceann wrote:
Where did you find the rules for a rad grenades col?

The special rule for the Unusual Grenade called a rad grenade is in the Imperial Agent codex. The rules for grenade and Unusual Grenade is in the BRB. The rules for 'grenade' apply when dealing with rad grenades since the 'grenade' in 'rad grenade' is not capitalized to be a proper noun.

Wrong.

Unusual Grenade is not a special rule.
Nice of you to try to sneak that in.
Unusual Grenade is a rule in the weapons section of the BRB.
The BRB Special rules section states they have put ALL the special rules in the BRB in the Special Rules section.

Unusual Grenades is not in the Special Rules section.
Basic vs Advanced tells us that we use the rules of a codex if there is a conflict.

The conflict is that per the BRB no wargear called rad grenades exist.

We use the rules in the Codex.

Ceann wrote:
Wrong.

Unusual Grenade is not a special rule.
Nice of you to try to sneak that in.
Unusual Grenade is a rule in the weapons section of the BRB.
The BRB Special rules section states they have put ALL the special rules in the BRB in the Special Rules section.

Unusual Grenades is not in the Special Rules section.

Never said it was. Unusual Grenades have special rules by definition.



This is the rad grenade special rule that defines the effect of the rad grenade.




You have no argument, Ceann.

rad grenade is in lower case, not in upper case. It's not a proper noun. You are required to use the 40k definition for 'grenade'.

This thread is over.

Unusual Grenades is not a special rule.
Rad Grenades are not listed in the BRB as grenades.
Rad Grenades do not exist in the BRB.
This is a conflict.

Because there is a conflict we use the rules of the codex.
Not some of the rules of the codex, all of the rules of the codex.
Are Rad grenades listed as a weapon in the Codex: IA ?
No.
Do we consult the BRB?
No.


:::is in lower case, not in upper case. It's not a proper noun. You are required to use the 40k definition for 'grenade'. :::

That? That is not a rule. Please quote the page that states that rule.

Ceann wrote:
Unusual Grenades is not a special rule.
Rad Grenades are not listed in the BRB as grenades.
Rad Grenades do not exist in the BRB.
This is a conflict.

It's 'rad grenade' not 'Rad Grenade'.

There is no conflict.

'grenade' is an indexed term in 40k and 'grenade' is not in the Imperial Agent index. As per any indexed term, (e.g. 'Instant Death') you go to the index referenced section in the BRB.

Go to the Grenades section and find the rule for Unusual Grenades which applies.

In order to decipher the text for 'rad grenade' I must make several trips to the BRB via the index (e.g. Instant Death, Toughness, assault, turn, and grenade)


You have no argument.

'rad grenade' is not a proper noun.

Please show me the rule.

"""'grenade' is an indexed term in 40k and 'grenade' is not in the Imperial Agent index. As per any indexed term, (e.g. 'Instant Death') you go to the index referenced section in the BRB. """"

I really hope its in the Special Rules section.

Someone put this thread out of its misery, it's clearly in pain. Poor thing.

We WERE having a discussion until Col_Wordsoup showed up.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
He picks like 3 words and indefatigably pursues them.

Ceann wrote:
Please show me the rule.

"""'grenade' is an indexed term in 40k and 'grenade' is not in the Imperial Agent index. As per any indexed term, (e.g. 'Instant Death') you go to the index referenced section in the BRB. """"

Go ahead and decipher 'Instant Death', 'turn', and 'assault' without using the BRB. See what you come up with!

The rules for Army List Entry allow you to look around for rules from multiple sources, from the codex to the BRB. In the case of 'grenade' there is no Codex defined term but rather a BRB defined term so you use that.

once again col_impact is just creating fake rules without providing a source when the RAW is clear cut.

The wargear entry does not direct him to reference the BRB rules for grenades, yet he chooses to do so insisting that an un-cited naming convention based upon the BRB index exists for him to do so. He blatantly ignores the RAW of the wargear entry, out of thin air he creates a rule (naming convention/BRB index to dictate rules) with zero RAW citation, and then repeats it over and over as RAW. The last part is the most egregious as he is willingly repeating a lie of his creation to substantiate a premise that he knows is not founded on RAW.

Actually all of the rules for rad grenades are located in the Appendix of the Codex: IA under special wargear.

Nothing requires me to consult the BRB.
You cannot quote this "index" rule because it doesn't exist.
Another fabrication, one of the many you start making when you lose arguments.

Page 13 BRB -
conflict will arise between a rule in this rulebook, and one printed in a codex. Where this occurs, the rule printed in the codex or Army List Entry always takes precedence.

The conflict is that if I read the BRB page to page there is no entry for Rad grenades, I MUST consult the codex.

Per your own words when I asked you, the rad grenades are located in the Codex: IA.

The appendix states the rule for rad grenades. It does not state a reference to the BRB, therefore it has none.

This index nonsense is word magic you are attempting to use in order to "win" you don't care about actual representation of the rules. You just want to "win".

Since when has the NAME of gear determined anything?

 Brother Ramses wrote:
once again col_impact is just creating fake rules without providing a source when the RAW is clear cut.

The wargear entry does not direct him to reference the BRB rules for grenades, yet he chooses to do so insisting that an un-cited naming convention based upon the BRB index exists for him to do so. He blatantly ignores the RAW of the wargear entry, out of thin air he creates a rule (naming convention/BRB index to dictate rules) with zero RAW citation, and then repeats it over and over as RAW. The last part is the most egregious as he is willingly repeating a lie of his creation to substantiate a premise that he knows is not founded on RAW.

'grenade' is a 40k defined term.

'grenade' is not defined in the Imperial Agent codex.

I am allowed to find definitions for terms in the BRB. If I am not allowed, then I can not decipher any codex. Moreover, the rule for Army List Entry allows me to find the BRB definition for 'grenade'



Automatically Appended Next Post:

Ceann wrote:
Actually all of the rules for rad grenades are located in the Appendix of the Codex: IA under special wargear.

Nothing requires me to consult the BRB.
You cannot quote this "index" rule because it doesn't exist.
Another fabrication, one of the many you start making when you lose arguments.

Page 13 BRB -
conflict will arise between a rule in this rulebook, and one printed in a codex. Where this occurs, the rule printed in the codex or Army List Entry always takes precedence.

Per your own words when I asked you, the rad grenades are located in the Codex: IA.

The appendix states the rule for rad grenades. It does not state a reference to the BRB, therefore it has none.

This index nonsense is word magic you are attempting to use in order to "win" you don't care about actual representation of the rules. You just want to "win".

'grenade' is not defined in the Imperial Agent codex. It is defined in the BRB.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Ceann wrote:
Actually all of the rules for rad grenades are located in the Appendix of the Codex: IA under special wargear.

Nothing requires me to consult the BRB.

"During a turn in which a unit equipped with rad grenades launches an assault, or is assaulted, the enemy unit(s) suffer a -1 penalty to their Toughness until the end of the phase (this does affect the victims’ Instant Death threshold)."


Ok. Then what is 'turn', 'assault', 'Toughness', and 'Instant Death' without using the BRB.

"grenade" is also not a special rule, it takes no precedence over the codex.

When did the name of a wargear become a rule?
Please show me the page.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Ok. Then what is 'turn', 'assault', 'Toughness', and 'Instant Death' without using the BRB.

Are terms that are not currently defined in the codex. Because they are not defined in the codex and listed as the RULES for a piece of wargear, we are permitted by the rules for Army List Entry's to consult the BRB to define those rules.

We do not need to consult the BRB to determine grenade, nothing is requiring we do so.

Ceann wrote:
"grenade" is also not a special rule, it takes no precedence over the codex.

When did the name of a wargear become a rule?
Please show me the page.

'grenade' is not a proper noun. The Imperial Agent codex provides no definition for 'grenade'. The BRB does. I am completely permitted to access the BRB definition.

col_impact wrote:

 Brother Ramses wrote:
once again col_impact is just creating fake rules without providing a source when the RAW is clear cut.

The wargear entry does not direct him to reference the BRB rules for grenades, yet he chooses to do so insisting that an un-cited naming convention based upon the BRB index exists for him to do so. He blatantly ignores the RAW of the wargear entry, out of thin air he creates a rule (naming convention/BRB index to dictate rules) with zero RAW citation, and then repeats it over and over as RAW. The last part is the most egregious as he is willingly repeating a lie of his creation to substantiate a premise that he knows is not founded on RAW.

'grenade' is a 40k defined term.

'grenade' is not defined in the Imperial Agent codex.

I am allowed to find definitions for terms in the BRB. If I am not allowed, then I can not decipher any codex. Moreover, the rule for Army List Entry allows me to find the BRB definition for 'grenade'



Automatically Appended Next Post:

Ceann wrote:
Actually all of the rules for rad grenades are located in the Appendix of the Codex: IA under special wargear.

Nothing requires me to consult the BRB.
You cannot quote this "index" rule because it doesn't exist.
Another fabrication, one of the many you start making when you lose arguments.

Page 13 BRB -
conflict will arise between a rule in this rulebook, and one printed in a codex. Where this occurs, the rule printed in the codex or Army List Entry always takes precedence.

Per your own words when I asked you, the rad grenades are located in the Codex: IA.

The appendix states the rule for rad grenades. It does not state a reference to the BRB, therefore it has none.

This index nonsense is word magic you are attempting to use in order to "win" you don't care about actual representation of the rules. You just want to "win".

'grenade' is not defined in the Imperial Agent codex. It is defined in the BRB.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Ceann wrote:
Actually all of the rules for rad grenades are located in the Appendix of the Codex: IA under special wargear.

Nothing requires me to consult the BRB.

"During a turn in which a unit equipped with rad grenades launches an assault, or is assaulted, the enemy unit(s) suffer a -1 penalty to their Toughness until the end of the phase (this does affect the victims’ Instant Death threshold)."


Ok. Then what is 'turn', 'assault', 'Toughness', and 'Instant Death' without using the BRB.

You ignore the RAW, create rules under RAI assumptions without citing any RAW as evidence, and then lie passing them off as RAW.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

col_impact wrote:

Ceann wrote:
"grenade" is also not a special rule, it takes no precedence over the codex.

When did the name of a wargear become a rule?
Please show me the page.

'grenade' is not a proper noun. The Imperial Agent codex provides no definition for 'grenade'. The BRB does. I am completely permitted to access the BRB definition.

You ignore the RAW, create rules under RAI assumptions without citing any RAW as evidence, and then lie passing them off as RAW.

Can you help me find the rules section for "nouns"?
What page is that on?

Ceann wrote:

col_impact wrote:
Ok. Then what is 'turn', 'assault', 'Toughness', and 'Instant Death' without using the BRB.

Are terms that are not currently defined in the codex. Because they are not defined in the codex and listed as the RULES for a piece of wargear, we are permitted by the rules for Army List Entry's to consult the BRB to define those rules.

We do not need to consult the BRB to determine grenade, nothing is requiring we do so.

You do need to consult the BRB to determine grenade. Nothing is requiring you to consult for 'assault' but in order to decipher what the rules mean about 'assault' or 'grenade' you must consult the BRB.

Remember, 'grenade' is not a proper noun.

You have no argument.

rad grenades are grenades

The thread is over.

Rad grenades are not grenades, rad grenades are the name of a wargear. The name of a wargear is not a rule.