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.

Ghorgul.

I have outlined a 100% legal process and you have yet to point out where it is illegal.




Someone mentioned a FAQ that would make what I am doing illegal. Does someone want to post it? Outside of posting that rumored FAQ nothing has been presented that makes the process outlined above illegal.

That is not what I am referring too.

col_impact wrote:
Ghorgul.

I have outlined a 100% legal process and you have yet to point out where it is illegal.

Spoiler:

1) I equip my Terminator Captain model, replacing his power sword with a chainfist. (He is in terminator armour so he may replace and he does)

2) I swap the Terminator Captain's terminator armour for Cataphractii terminator armour. (He keeps his chainfist since the Captain model make legally take Terminator Weapon items)

3) The Terminator Captain purchases a bike. (He is not restricted from doing so since he is not in terminator armour)

4) I now have a Terminator Captain with a power fist and a bike in Cataphractii armour. (He has a completely legal configuration for Cataphractii armour)

Someone mentioned a FAQ. Does someone want to post it?

You are ignoring my arguments. It is not about the process, this dispute is not about the process, you need to produce legal Army Force Roster, as quoted earlier. I have shown that it is impossible with your process shown.

You can lead a dead horse to water and beat it black and blue, but that won't stop it from rinse and repeating the same tactic on YMDC as it does in every thread when asked to provide proof of RAW when actually presenting yet another skewed RAI argument.

X wargear list -
X is whatever codex you wish it to be, this to my knowledge is uniform language.

These lists detail the points and values of various wargear available to units in your army. Many units entries... etc etc.
>>>>>> RULES <<<<<< for these items can be found in the appendix.


Note. NEVER at any point in the wargear options breakdown description which is included in every codex before any units pages does it call the war gear options as rules. They are options, not rules, they therefore have no legality to act as a rule.

Note #2 We are told to find the RULES for the wargear in the appendix.

The codex space marines that we are explicitly told to look at has rules requiring you to wear terminator armor to take items.

"May take items from" is not a rule, it is a wargear option. A wargear option does not supersede codex space marines.

Ghorgul wrote:
You are ignoring my arguments. It is not about the process, this dispute is not about the process, you need to produce legal Army Force Roster, as quoted earlier. I have shown that it is impossible with your process shown.

The Army Force Roster only cares that the end result is 100% legal. My process results in an end result that is 100% legal.

The Terminator Captain model has permission to "take items from the Terminator Weapons" list.

A Terminator Captain with a chainfist, bike, and Cataphractii armour is a legal configuration.




Automatically Appended Next Post:

Ceann wrote:
X wargear list -
X is whatever codex you wish it to be, this to my knowledge is uniform language.

These lists detail the points and values of various wargear available to units in your army. Many units entries... etc etc.
>>>>>> RULES <<<<<< for these items can be found in the appendix.


Note. NEVER at any point in the wargear options breakdown description which is included in every codex before any units pages does it call the war gear options as rules. They are options, not rules, they therefore have no legality to act as a rule.

Note #2 We are told to find the RULES for the wargear in the appendix.

The codex space marines that we are explicitly told to look at has rules requiring you to wear terminator armor to take items.

"May take items from" is not a rule, it is a wargear option. A wargear option does not supersede codex space marines.

The definitions Charistoph cited disagree with you. You need to find a citation proving that a wargear option is not a rule. Good luck with that.

If you look at the 13 point or whatever breakdown of a data sheet you will note that the wargear options is not labeled as a section.

Ghorgul wrote:

col_impact wrote:
Ghorgul.

I have outlined a 100% legal process and you have yet to point out where it is illegal.

Spoiler:

1) I equip my Terminator Captain model, replacing his power sword with a chainfist. (He is in terminator armour so he may replace and he does)

2) I swap the Terminator Captain's terminator armour for Cataphractii terminator armour. (He keeps his chainfist since the Captain model make legally take Terminator Weapon items)

3) The Terminator Captain purchases a bike. (He is not restricted from doing so since he is not in terminator armour)

4) I now have a Terminator Captain with a power fist and a bike in Cataphractii armour. (He has a completely legal configuration for Cataphractii armour)

Someone mentioned a FAQ. Does someone want to post it?

You are ignoring my arguments. It is not about the process, this dispute is not about the process, you need to produce legal Army Force Roster, as quoted earlier. I have shown that it is impossible with your process shown.

Actually a nice solid take from a different angle; not arguing the timing shenanigans being pulled, but the complete inability to provide a legal roster due to the timing shenanigans. I asked him something along the same lines as to what rules expire and when since he dumps the terminator armor for the chainfist and automatically assumes the permission from wearing the terminator armor carries over. Yet another RAI argument from Col.

 Brother Ramses wrote:
You can lead a dead horse to water and beat it black and blue, but that won't stop it from rinse and repeating the same tactic on YMDC as it does in every thread when asked to provide proof of RAW when actually presenting yet another skewed RAI argument.

Feel free to point out how any of this is illegal.

col_impact wrote:


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 doctortom wrote:
Prove that the same process can't be used with a vanilla Space Marine Captain to provide him with a bike and with terminator armor.

Why?

Because you made a statement that was not true, and (as usual) you didn't provide any proof when refuted. When you insisted the supplement overrode the codex you didn't acknowledge that you were wrong there when proof was demanded, you changed arguments. We have another situation, you stated that you do not require history in order to legally get the terminator weapons and the cataphracti armor, which I demonstrated was not true. Yet you refuse to acknowledge that you are relying on history for this. You've been asked repeatedly to prove this. You don't want to? Fine. We'll just have to assume that you just don't want to admit that you don't want to admit that you're wrong in anything. That goes to how much credence people should give anything else you say.

But you notice he has changed his argument since the beginning to account for his initial failure. It is now a sequencing argument to get around wearing Cataphracti armor, that isn't terminator armor, yet wielding terminator only weaponry.

col_impact wrote:
The Army Force Roster only cares that the end result is 100% legal. My process results in an end result that is 100% legal

This remains unproven.

col_impact wrote:

The Terminator Captain model has permission to "take items from the Terminator Weapons" list.

I am not sure what you claim in this, this is not under dispute.

col_impact wrote:

A Terminator Captain with a chainfist, bike, and Cataphractii armour is a legal configuration.

This remains unproven, you have not provided rule quotes in support of this.

I give my regular captain a bike-legal
I then give him terminator armor-by your logic, this is legal.
Is the end result legal?

 doctortom wrote:

col_impact wrote:


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 doctortom wrote:
Prove that the same process can't be used with a vanilla Space Marine Captain to provide him with a bike and with terminator armor.

Why?

Because you made a statement that was not true, and (as usual) you didn't provide any proof when refuted. When you insisted the supplement overrode the codex you didn't acknowledge that you were wrong there when proof was demanded, you changed arguments. We have another situation, you stated that you do not require history in order to legally get the terminator weapons and the cataphracti armor, which I demonstrated was not true. Yet you refuse to acknowledge that you are relying on history for this. You've been asked repeatedly to prove this. You don't want to? Fine. We'll just have to assume that you just don't want to admit that you don't want to admit that you're wrong in anything. That goes to how much credence people should give anything else you say.

I have outlined a 100% legal process and you have yet to point out where it is illegal. Everything is copacetic according to the rules.



The burden is on you to show how this process is illegal. If you cannot then you have no choice but to accept it.

You mentioned a FAQ. Are you going to post it or not?

To hell with sequence.
If you take terminator only items you follow all rules for terminators.
A model is either a terminator or it's not.

You don't get to cheery pick rules as you feel.

If your taking an item that's terminator only then you accept it has to be a terminator to do so.

 JNAProductions wrote:
I give my regular captain a bike-legal
I then give him terminator armor-by your logic, this is legal.
Is the end result legal?

When you give him terminator armor he has to give up the bike.

 JNAProductions wrote:
I give my regular captain a bike-legal
I then give him terminator armor-by your logic, this is legal.
Is the end result legal?

This was ignored

Edit: so why doesn't tinge terminator captain have to do the same?

What Charistoph quoted was wrong col inventor. In the 13 point breakdown of a data sheet wargear options are not includes. The only thing there is wargear currently being worn. Rules are applied to the game you do not apply rules when you aren't playing the game.

Wargear has rules, the wargear options section does not have rules.

You must obey the wargear rules in codex spacemarines, you cannot refute this with a wargear option because it isn't a rule.

 Jackal wrote:
To hell with sequence.
If you take terminator only items you follow all rules for terminators.
A model is either a terminator or it's not.

You don't get to cheery pick rules as you feel.

If your taking an item that's terminator only then you accept it has to be a terminator to do so.

I guess you missed the part where the Terminator Captain has permission to take items from the Terminator Weapons list, irrespective of whether the Captain is in terminator armour or Cataphractii armour.

col_impact wrote:

 doctortom wrote:

col_impact wrote:


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 doctortom wrote:
Prove that the same process can't be used with a vanilla Space Marine Captain to provide him with a bike and with terminator armor.

Why?

Because you made a statement that was not true, and (as usual) you didn't provide any proof when refuted. When you insisted the supplement overrode the codex you didn't acknowledge that you were wrong there when proof was demanded, you changed arguments. We have another situation, you stated that you do not require history in order to legally get the terminator weapons and the cataphracti armor, which I demonstrated was not true. Yet you refuse to acknowledge that you are relying on history for this. You've been asked repeatedly to prove this. You don't want to? Fine. We'll just have to assume that you just don't want to admit that you don't want to admit that you're wrong in anything. That goes to how much credence people should give anything else you say.

I have outlined a 100% legal process and you have yet to point out where it is illegal. Everything is copacetic according to the rules.

Spoiler:

1) I equip my Terminator Captain model, replacing his power sword with a chainfist. (He is in terminator armour so he may replace and he does)

2) I swap the Terminator Captain's terminator armour for Cataphractii terminator armour. (He keeps his chainfist since the Captain model make legally take Terminator Weapon items)

3) The Terminator Captain purchases a bike. (He is not restricted from doing so since he is not in terminator armour)

4) I now have a Terminator Captain with a power fist and a bike in Cataphractii armour. (He has a completely legal configuration for Cataphractii armour)

The burden is on you to show how this process is illegal. If you cannot then you have no choice but to accept it.

You mentioned a FAQ. Are you going to post it or not?

You stated that you do not rely on history. As I pointed out, this relies on history - you have to historically know which order things were taken. Now, you said you can do it wihtout history. Your 4 step list is not proof. If I have to remember which order things are in, I have to remember the history. It seems you can't even admit you were wrong that your dodge here REQUIRES you to remember the history after chastising us that we have been relying on history to deny your (false) claims about the supplement automatically overriding the codex despite the lack of statements in the supplement saying this. You didn't even bother to say HOW we are relying on history. Here I have said how you are. So, do you still insist you don't rely on history for this?

Can you now show me the wording where it states irrespective of whether the captain is in terminator armour or not please?
As such a statement was your idea of RAI and does not exist.

Ceann wrote:
What Charistoph quoted was wrong col inventor. In the 13 point breakdown of a data sheet wargear options are not includes. The only thing there is wargear currently being worn. Rules are applied to the game you do not apply rules when you aren't playing the game.

Wargear has rules, the wargear options section does not have rules.

You must obey the wargear rules in codex spacemarines, you cannot refute this with a wargear option because it isn't a rule.

 Brother Ramses wrote:
But you notice he has changed his argument since the beginning to account for his initial failure. It is now a sequencing argument to get around wearing Cataphracti armor, that isn't terminator armor, yet wielding terminator only weaponry.

col_impact has so far argued his case with:
1)ambulances
2)girlfriends pitbull (or some other dog breed, don't remember, don't care!)
3)"specific permission over general rule" which is not supported by anything
4)history
5)process, which is special case of history

All his arguments have been discredited, and often several times as he keeps on repeating his claims and disregarding other peoples opposing arguments, dodging questions and demanding other people produce rule quotes with page numbers while at the same time failing to produce rule quotes himself.

You ask us to tell you what rules you are breaking but the real question is, what rules are you using? Nothing is permitted in 40k. You are told explicitly what you can do, if you are not told you can do it, then you cannot.

You assume you can magically run through the wargear checkout line multiple times. Such a thing does not exist you need to prove it does.

A supplement does not supersede a codex, you need to prove it does.

You never have proof, you are like the boy who cried wolf, you keep quoting rules and phrasing that do not exist, no one be lives you.

 Jackal wrote:
Can you now show me the wording where it states irrespective of whether the captain is in terminator armour or not please?
As such a statement was your idea of RAI and does not exist.

The model itself has this option . . .

May take items from the Terminator list.... is not a rule. Look at the 13 point data sheet guide, wargear options do not exist. Under wargear options section it tells you to use the RULES for the wargear in the appendix, in this case the appendix is codex space marines.

May take items from, are wargear options not rules and in the face of rules they are meaningless words.

Ghorgul wrote:

 Brother Ramses wrote:
But you notice he has changed his argument since the beginning to account for his initial failure. It is now a sequencing argument to get around wearing Cataphracti armor, that isn't terminator armor, yet wielding terminator only weaponry.

col_impact has so far argued his case with:
1)ambulances
2)girlfriends pitbull (or some other dog breed, don't remember, don't care!)
3)"specific permission over general rule" which is not supported by anything
4)history
5)process, which is special case of history

All his arguments have been discredited, and often several times as he keeps on repeating his claims and disregarding other peoples opposing arguments, dodging questions and demanding other people produce rule quotes with page numbers while at the same time failing to produce rule quotes himself.

Looks like you are refusing to take up the challenge . ..

I have outlined a 100% legal process and you have yet to point out where it is illegal. Everything is copacetic according to the rules.



Feel free to point out something illegal. If you cannot then you must accept it as legal.

Ceann wrote:
May take items from the Terminator list.... is not a rule. Look at the 13 point data sheet guide, wargear options do not exist. Under wargear options section it tells you to use the RULES for the wargear in the appendix, in this case the appendix is codex space marines.

May take items from, are wargear options not rules and in the face of rules they are meaningless words.

Please, try col.

Ceann wrote:
May take items from the Terminator list.... is not a rule. Look at the 13 point data sheet guide, wargear options do not exist. Under wargear options section it tells you to use the RULES for the wargear in the appendix, in this case the appendix is codex space marines.

May take items from, are wargear options not rules and in the face of rules they are meaningless words.

Already answered by Charistoph and myself.

 Charistoph wrote:

Ceann wrote:
Please look at the diagram and tell me where it states wargear options are rules? It doesn't because they are not rules, they have no legal grounds as rules.

From the Datasheets page of Codex: Space Marines:
"Each Space Marines unit in this book has a datasheet. These detail either Army List Entries or Formations, providing all the rules information that you will need to use your models in your games of Warhammer 40,000."

From the BRB:
"Army List Entries
The rules for your Citadel miniatures are found in a wide range of Games Workshop publications, such as codexes, codex supplements and dataslates.

Regardless of where this information is found, it is known as an Army List Entry. Each Army List Entry describes a unit of Citadel miniatures and includes everything you will need to know in order to use that unit in a game
of Warhammer 40,000.

In some older codexes, the information for a single unit’s Army List Entry is spread out amongst different sections of the book. Taken together they describe, and are treated for all rules purposes as, a single Army List Entry. When using such a codex, each unit’s Faction is the same as its codex title. For example, all units in Codex: Space Marines belong to the Space Marines Faction, whilst all units in Codex: Chaos Daemons belong to the Chaos Daemons Faction."

Sorry, they are rules as far as I can tell. And if they weren't rules, they would have no power to do anything to the game. Every Captain would be stuck without Wargear and no rules to even get Terminator Armour in the first place.

Wonderful! Do you see any part of that which said they were rules? I didn't see the world rule in the entire thing.

But the wargear options section tells you where to find the rules.