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.

 Brother Ramses wrote:


Again, I don't need to show you breaking a rule, only show that you are basing your stance is based on RAI and therefore the legality of your stance is based upon your opinion and nothing more. The burden of proof is upon you to prove the RAW as you are making a RAW claim, but only backing it with RAI assumptions.

I am not basing any of my stance on any RAI. The process I lay out follows plainly stated rules and I break no rules. Thus, it is purely according to the Rules As Written.

It is up to you to show rules that I am violating or rules that would direct us otherwise than the procedure laid out below.

Otherwise what I am doing is perfectly legal and according to the rules.

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 may 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 chainfist and a bike in Cataphractii armour. (He has a completely legal configuration for Cataphractii armour)

col_impact wrote:

 Brother Ramses wrote:


Again, I don't need to show you breaking a rule, only show that you are basing your stance is based on RAI and therefore the legality of your stance is based upon your opinion and nothing more. The burden of proof is upon you to prove the RAW as you are making a RAW claim, but only backing it with RAI assumptions.

I am not basing any of my stance on any RAI. The process I lay out follows plainly stated rules and I break no rules. Thus, it is purely according to the Rules As Written.

It is up to you to show rules that I am violating or rules that would direct us otherwise than the procedure laid out below.

Otherwise what I am doing is perfectly legal and according to the rules.

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 may 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 chainfist and a bike in Cataphractii armour. (He has a completely legal configuration for Cataphractii armour)

its RAI on the basis that you 'order' your purchase, also RAI on the basis that the Cataphratii doesn't invalidate the chainfist, while at the same time giving you access to the bike

GodDamUser wrote:


its RAI on the basis that you 'order' your purchase, also RAI on the basis that the Cataphratii doesn't invalidate the chainfist, while at the same time giving you access to the bike

Are there rules that indicate some other procedure? My process follows plainly stated rules and any and all rules that are available on the matter.

Why would you think the Cataphratii invalidates the chainfist? The permission to take items from the Terminator Weapons list is attributed to the actual Terminator Captain model.

In order for you show that my process is not RAW you need to actually show some conflict with some rule.




Unless you can find something illegal, you should be giving the thumbs up that it's perfectly legal.

So I am waiting for you (or anyone) to point out what exactly is illegal. If you cannot, then I will take it as tacit acceptance of legality.

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

This is the questionable part.

It runs on the presumption that there is Order to the buying and then removing a requirement for a item means you get to keep the item

Edit: Duder on a bike totally legit I would love to see someone make that model..

it is the wargear justification that I find is iffy

Is this just going to be the new standard of YMDC? Col_impact picks a ridiculous topic and everyone tries to reason with him for 20+ pages?

Maybe we should actually just have a mod enforce the tenets upon him?

All he has to do is supply the required information and he refuses to do so.
He has to provide a precedence set that purchasing items works this way.

The standard practice is to check a submitted list against the rules and see if anything is awry.
He wants to play dressing room fantasy to circumvent that.

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

This is the questionable part.

It runs on the presumption that there is Order to the buying and then removing a requirement for a item means you get to keep the item

No presumptions. I simply provide a process to generate an end result that is a 100% legal build (Terminator Captain with chainfist, bike, and Cataphractii armour) and I let the rules dictate what I do.

I follow the steps methodically. I am not allowed to remove an item unless the rules direct me to, so I don't remove any items when I replace the Terminator armour for Cataphractii armour.

At no point in the following of the steps do I make an illegal build.

You presume that all of these actions take place sequentially instead of simultaneously.

The difference is you going into and out of a store multiple times making single purchases, compared to buying all of your purchases at once.
At the end of the day, you have to ARRIVE AT A TABLE and put a list down in front of another player.

They will look at your list, you cannot explain away, while I did all these changing of garmets in my magic warddrobe to wear these.

The list will show a chainfist from terminator weapons that requires terminator armor be worn in order to bring it into a battle.
And not a suit of terminator armor in sight.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Since there is NO PRECEDENCE for buying items sequentially as opposed to supplying an entire army list with all of your wargear purchases. You have no basis to assume you can purchase items in this manner.

Ceann wrote:
You presume that all of these actions take place sequentially instead of simultaneously.

The difference is you going into and out of a store multiple times making single purchases, compared to buying all of your purchases at once.

What do the rules say on the matter?

If they say nothing, then either is allowable so long as you wind up with an entirely legal combination, which I do.

But yes you follow steps..

but the purchasing a unit isn't actually a step process, it has a break down of components but the actual purchase happens at once.

This is what makes your argument pure RAI

Your character became Illegal as he no longer has the termi armour that gave him the Chainfist

Ceann wrote:

Since there is NO PRECEDENCE for buying items sequentially as opposed to supplying an entire army list with all of your wargear purchases. You have no basis to assume you can purchase items in this manner.

I am presenting a 100% legal combination in a Force Org all at one time.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

GodDamUser wrote:
But yes you follow steps..

but the purchasing a unit isn't actually a step process, it has a break down of components but the actual purchase happens at once.

Do you have rules to back up what you say? It's actually a bold assumption on your part that it happens at once.

GodDamUser wrote:
Your character became Illegal as he no longer has the termi armour that gave him the Chainfist

Incorrect. The Termi armour only allows him to replace storm bolter/power sword with chain fist, etc. The permission to take Terminator Weapon items is an indissociable attribute of the Terminator Captain model. So he never becomes illegal with the chainfist.

No, you are not.

The Chainfist does not forget that it is from Terminator Weapons and requires Terminator Armor to be worn in order to be used.

Your submitted wargear list does not contain terminator armor, so you were not able to acquire a chainfist.

What you did in your dressing room before you landed on the battlefield is irrelevant. Your commander sends you home.
You are not wearing terminator armor, therefore you may not exchange your powersword for a chain fist.

"I WAS wearing terminator armor" isn't a rule.

.

Ceann wrote:
No, you are not.

The Chainfist does not forget that it is from Terminator Weapons and requires Terminator Armor to be worn in order to be used.

Again you make this claim with no support. There is absolutely no rule that says a chainfist requires terminator armour to be used. You are spreading misinformation!

The permission to take Terminator Weapon items is an indissociable attribute of the Terminator Captain model.

It is not. The datasheet for the Terminator Captain model TELLS YOU to see Codex: Space Marines.

Why does it tell you to do this? Because of the question your refused to answer.

NO PAGE EXISTS in AoD that has special wargear or terminator weapons. So you must answer to the Space Marine Codex, not the "Terminator Captain" datasheet.

 firstsilentprophet wrote:
Cataphractii TERMINATOR Armour is TERMINATOR armour.

There is no question, no assumption.

Terminator armour is terminator armour. Black is black, White is white. Light Blue is still blue; just a lighter shade of blue.

Cataphractii Terminator armour is just a different pattern terminator armour than Indomitus terminator armour. The codices refer generically to terminator armour - they dont call it out as Indomitus. Does that mean you can never play terminators, because there is no specific Indomitus Terminator reference? No....Why....Because Cataphractii Terminator armour, and Indomitus Terminator armour is TERMINATOR ARMOUR. Its not power armour...Its not scout armour...Its Terminator armour, and you can't ride a bike or use a jetpack with terminator armour.

This rule disagrees with you.



On YMDC we pay attention to what the rules say.

Your entire argument included in your spoiler is a claim you are making with no support.

There is absolutely no rule that says a purchasing items a sequential event. You are spreading misinformation!

By Cols Argument


1. Captain buys a bike

2. Captain buys terminator armour

Have captain on bike in termi armour because of order of purchase

Ceann wrote:
Your entire argument included in your spoiler is a claim you are making with no support.

There is absolutely no rule that says a purchasing items a sequential event.

Do you have a rule that says how we are to purchase items?

If not, then the rules only care that we provide legal builds for Force Orgs, which I do, no problem.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

GodDamUser wrote:
By Cols Argument


1. Captain buys a bike

2. Captain buys terminator armour

Have captain on bike in termi armour because of order of purchase

Results in illegal build.



My process does not result in an illegal build.

You must be sitting down? This is clearly going over your head.

A terminator captain is a terminator. He can't ride a bike or use a jump pack. He is a terminator. If he was wearing tartos armour, he still can't ride a bike or use a jump pack. He is a TERMINATOR.

You buy him whatever you like, provided terminator suitable war-gear.

col_impact wrote:

GodDamUser wrote:
By Cols Argument


1. Captain buys a bike

2. Captain buys terminator armour

Have captain on bike in termi armour because of order of purchase

Results in illegal build.

Spoiler:

- Space Marine bike 1 …20 pts
1 May not be taken by models wearing Terminator armour.

My process does not result in an illegal build.

Spoiler:

OPTIONS:
May take items from the Terminator Weapons [list]

But he took that war gear while in Power Armour

then got the Termi Armour

So and nothing says I have to drop the item

its the exact same argument as you are presenting, As he is no longer in the required item he no longer has access to the wargear

 firstsilentprophet wrote:
You must be sitting down? This is clearly going over your head.

A terminator captain is a terminator. He can't ride a bike or use a jump pack. He is a terminator. If he was wearing tartos armour, he still can't ride a bike or use a jump pack. He is a TERMINATOR.

You buy him whatever you like, provided terminator suitable war-gear.

Read this rule carefully.

 firstsilentprophet wrote:
You must be sitting down? This is clearly going over your head.

A terminator captain is a terminator. He can't ride a bike or use a jump pack. He is a terminator. If he was wearing tartos armour, he still can't ride a bike or use a jump pack. He is a TERMINATOR.

You buy him whatever you like, provided terminator suitable war-gear.

First you are new to this.

The aim of the game here is to present the Rules to Col, so he can repeat himself over and over about how he is trying to break the game works.

He will also deny anything that plays his own process against him.


It is quite relaxing and makes them work hours disappear quite quickly

It is April 12 right....not April 1?

GodDamUser wrote:


But he took that war gear while in Power Armour

then got the Termi Armour

So and nothing says I have to drop the item

its the exact same argument as you are presenting, As he is no longer in the required item he no longer has access to the wargear

A bike cannot be taken by a model in terminator armor.

A chainfist can be taken by a Terminator Captain. A Terminator Captain "may take items from the Terminator Weapons [list]".

Ceann wrote:
Your entire argument included in your spoiler is a claim you are making with no support.

There is absolutely no rule that says a purchasing items a sequential event. You are spreading misinformation!

Indeed. There is no defined order of operations for purchasing options in an army list entry.

However, if we consider the fact that it would be rather pointless to restrict Terminator-equipped models from purchasing bikes and jump packs, but not restricting bike/jump pack-equipped models from buying Terminator Armour, seems to indicate that a step-by-step process is not intended, but rather a final validation method to make sure that everything is lined up and coherent together.

Still, that's just RAI going off of how to make it work semantically, not RAW as there is no literal statement defining it.

 Charistoph wrote:
However, if we consider the fact that it would be rather pointless to restrict Terminator-equipped models from purchasing bikes and jump packs, but not restricting bike/jump pack-equipped models from buying Terminator Armour, seems to indicate that a step-by-step process is not intended, but rather a final validation method to make sure that everything is lined up and coherent together.

Still, that's just RAI going off of how to make it work semantically, not RAW as there is no literal statement defining it.

Stop spelling out my point =P

 firstsilentprophet wrote:
It is April 12 right....not April 1?

With Col_Ignored, almost every day he posts can feel like April 1st, or you end up feeling like a bergen.

 Charistoph wrote:

Ceann wrote:
Your entire argument included in your spoiler is a claim you are making with no support.

There is absolutely no rule that says a purchasing items a sequential event. You are spreading misinformation!

Indeed. There is no defined order of operations for purchasing options in an army list entry.

However, if we consider the fact that it would be rather pointless to restrict Terminator-equipped models from purchasing bikes and jump packs, but not restricting bike/jump pack-equipped models from buying Terminator Armour, seems to indicate that a step-by-step process is not intended, but rather a final validation method to make sure that everything is lined up and coherent together.

Still, that's just RAI going off of how to make it work semantically, not RAW as there is no literal statement defining it.

Correct. Per RAW all we know is that there is only a final validation method to make sure everything is lined up and coherent together.

GodDamUser wrote:

 Charistoph wrote:
However, if we consider the fact that it would be rather pointless to restrict Terminator-equipped models from purchasing bikes and jump packs, but not restricting bike/jump pack-equipped models from buying Terminator Armour, seems to indicate that a step-by-step process is not intended, but rather a final validation method to make sure that everything is lined up and coherent together.

Still, that's just RAI going off of how to make it work semantically, not RAW as there is no literal statement defining it.

Stop spelling out my point =P

In the mouth of two or three witnesses...