AgentP Posted February 3, 2015 Report Share Posted February 3, 2015 I agree, I think that's pretty obviously what was intended, or else there would be no point in including FMC. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pretre Posted February 3, 2015 Author Report Share Posted February 3, 2015 Just saying that there have been some pretty obvious rules interactions in the past that they have faqd the opposite. That's why raw is important. It doesn't rely on unknowns, but instead on known facts. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Hanaur Posted February 3, 2015 Report Share Posted February 3, 2015 I love when someone knows clearly what GW was thinking... And I love those who ACT like they don't. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pretre Posted February 3, 2015 Author Report Share Posted February 3, 2015 And I love those who ACT like they don't. I don't act like [big bad swear word]. I discuss the rules as written because that is all we can really do without creating rules changes. If you want to discuss rules changes, that's great but that's not an interesting discussion. You want to make a rules change and call it a FAQ at your event? Feel free, it's your event. Don't act like it is obviously what GW meant though, because you have no way to know that. edit: To be more specific, GW doesn't even know what they meant half the time. How many FAQS have reversed themselves in a few months time or errata'd or FAQ'd something to be exactly opposite the conventional wisdom of what was intended? How many interactions have worked the opposite in different books? etc. so on. Unless you're the one writing the books in Nottingham (and probably not even then), you have no fethin' clue what the RAI actually is. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AbusePuppy Posted February 3, 2015 Report Share Posted February 3, 2015 And I love those who ACT like they don't. CLEARLY the Heldrake's flamer is a 360 degree weapon that is measured differently from every other gun in the game. Anyone who couldn't tell that from just looking at the model is basically trying to cheat. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pretre Posted February 3, 2015 Author Report Share Posted February 3, 2015 CLEARLY the Heldrake's flamer is a 360 degree weapon that is measured differently from every other gun in the game. Anyone who couldn't tell that from just looking at the model is basically trying to cheat. How many different rulings did that silly flamer get in FAQs? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Hanaur Posted February 3, 2015 Report Share Posted February 3, 2015 For my part, I'll just go ahead and play the rule as it was written to be played (WTBP) and leave others to go on acting as if some massive miasma of doubt hovers over how it was WTBP. I'll also remember this reasoning in the future when Pretre gives an opinion on a rule. I will simply invalidate his opinion by saying "now Pretre... Were you IIIIIIIIN Nottingham? Were ya'? I don't think ya' were..." I think you see how annoying that will become. About as annoying and irrelevant as it is today when he said it, I'll wager. Nah. We need to be better to each other than this I think. So I won't do it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pretre Posted February 3, 2015 Author Report Share Posted February 3, 2015 For my part, I'll just go ahead and play the rule as it was written to be played (WTBP) and leave others to go on acting as if some massive miasma of doubt hovers over how it was WTBP. I'll also remember this reasoning in the future when Pretre gives an opinion on a rule. I will simply invalidate his opinion by saying "now Pretre... Were you IIIIIIIIN Nottingham? Were ya'? I don't think ya' were..." I think you see how annoying that will become. About as annoying and irrelevant as it is today when he said it, I'll wager. Nah. We need to be better to each other than this I think. So I won't do it. The problem is that you have no idea how it was WTBP. You just have your idea of what you think they intended when they wrote it. It is just that. Your Opinion. Not the Rules as Intended. Not the WTBP. Just Your Opinion. Which is awesome. We should all have opinions. But those opinions are not facts. You'll note that I don't often give my opinions of RAI (without qualifying them as exactly that) for that reason. I give the Rules As Written, since those aren't up for debate, are quotable from the rulebook and are facts. And you're right. You being childish would be pretty annoying, so thanks for taking the high road. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AbusePuppy Posted February 3, 2015 Report Share Posted February 3, 2015 For my part, I'll just go ahead and play the rule as it was written to be played (WTBP) and leave others to go on acting as if some massive miasma of doubt hovers over how it was WTBP. It must be hard to be King Supergenius The Mighty Who Can Never Be Wrong About Anything. Does it pain you to suffer us mere mortals so, or are your graces so perfect that such trifling inconveniences don't even bother you? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
andozane Posted February 3, 2015 Report Share Posted February 3, 2015 ***MOD NOTE*** So...how about we move on from the obvious rules argument and negative comments, and focus on other aspects of the 'dex for the time being? 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
andozane Posted February 3, 2015 Report Share Posted February 3, 2015 Here is a question, and I'm making the assumption on this one... The C'Tan Nightbringer has his "Death Gaze" attack (excuse me, I do not have my codex in front of me at the moment). It does explicitly state you can use this shooting attack as well as the normal C'Tan shooting attack (kinda cool I think). But, from what I remember, the wording on the deathgaze is like "may select an enemy unit"... Does he have to target the same unit as his C'Tan shooting attack? I'm thinking yes... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Hanaur Posted February 3, 2015 Report Share Posted February 3, 2015 The wording is that you Select a target and then roll the D6 to see what happens. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pretre Posted February 3, 2015 Author Report Share Posted February 3, 2015 The wording is that you Select a target and then roll the D6 to see what happens. You're answering a different question than what he is asking. Ando: It is not listed as a shooting attack and as simply a special rule, so you can target whatever you want with it. Also, fun fact, since it's not a shooting attack guess what isn't restricted in CC? Also, guess what, since it isn't a shooting attack, isn't affected by Invisibility? Gaze of Death: In its Shooting phase, in addition to using Powers of the C'tan, this model can target one non-vehicle enemy unit within 12" to which it has line of sight. The unit sufferes a number of Wounds equal to 3D6 minus its Leadership, resolved at AP2 and with the Ignores Cover special rule....." Lastly, no overwatch with Gaze. No gaze if you run (or don't fire your Powers of the C'tan for some reason). These are RAW answers, btw. In case anyone is gonna go the RAI route. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Hanaur Posted February 3, 2015 Report Share Posted February 3, 2015 what is the text regarding shooting attacks, or attacks made in the shooting phase? Are they auto-defined as shooting attacks? But I would tend to agree if the BRB has nothing to say on that matter. That does make it akin to the Imperial Knights and their heavy Stubber. That Heavy stubber may be the most hated thing in the "codex". Lol. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
andozane Posted February 3, 2015 Report Share Posted February 3, 2015 Gaze of Death: In its Shooting phase, in addition to using Powers of the C'tan, this model can target one non-vehicle enemy unit within 12" to which it has line of sight. The unit sufferes a number of Wounds equal to 3D6 minus its Leadership, resolved at AP2 and with the Ignores Cover special rule....." Yikes...that power is even better than I had initially thought... This thing could be removing Riptides, WraithKnights and NDK's in one turn with that ability...invisible or not. Nice... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pretre Posted February 3, 2015 Author Report Share Posted February 3, 2015 Yikes...that power is even better than I had initially thought... This thing could be removing Riptides, WraithKnights and NDK's in one turn with that ability...invisible or not. Nice... I don't know if it's that good, but it certainly isn't bad. 10.5 average... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AbusePuppy Posted February 4, 2015 Report Share Posted February 4, 2015 Yikes...that power is even better than I had initially thought... This thing could be removing Riptides, WraithKnights and NDK's in one turn with that ability...invisible or not. Nice... It's a great tool, but it's really short-ranged, even more so than the other powers. I suspect that tournaments will rule that you can't use it while in CC, but RAW I don't think that's clear either way. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brother Glacius Posted February 4, 2015 Report Share Posted February 4, 2015 Why do you say you can't use it if they run? The wording denotes when it can be used. Why are you applying a restriction to it that isn't written? It is not a shooting attack. It is an ability that is used in the shooting phase. I can see GW coming back and declaring that this is a shooting attack. But currently, it doesn't state it.Also, the wording does not say "if they use their other power, then..." It says "in addition" simply denoting that you can perform both. RAW that is... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
andozane Posted February 4, 2015 Report Share Posted February 4, 2015 Actually, the inclusion of "in addition" would denote that you must use your C'Tan power first...then in addition, or "adding to it" you may use the Death Gaze. And since the C'Tan powers are shooting attacks, if you run you can't use your C'Tan power, and thus no Death Gaze... That is how I read it. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brother Glacius Posted February 4, 2015 Report Share Posted February 4, 2015 Yeah..I'm not going to agree with that definition. They are adding to the list of things the C'tan can do during the Shooting Phase. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pretre Posted February 4, 2015 Author Report Share Posted February 4, 2015 That one is unclear and at least debatable. I would go with it either way until FAQ'd. My gut is that you have to use the shooting powers first, but... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brother Glacius Posted February 4, 2015 Report Share Posted February 4, 2015 My opinion :) is that it is intended to be a shooting attack and GW will FAQ it as such. However, I don't see them forcing a player to do one before the other. That just doesn't make sense to me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pretre Posted February 4, 2015 Author Report Share Posted February 4, 2015 I severely doubt that they will FAQ it. Three months since the last one. I don't think they're doing the whole 'regular FAQs' thing. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AbusePuppy Posted February 5, 2015 Report Share Posted February 5, 2015 Why do you say you can't use it if they run? The wording denotes when it can be used. I would have to disagree. It states that the power can be used "in addition" the C'tan special attack, but it does NOT say it can be used in addition to Running (or performing any other replacement of the unit's normal shooting abilities, where applicable.) It specifically permits you to use it at a particular time and thus you cannot use it at other times (overwatch, etc) for the same reason that you can't just decide to assault during the shooting phase or otherwise perform out-of-sequence actions when you please. It's worth noting, however, that it is NOT a shooting attack (it does not roll to hit or count as firing a weapon), even though it does occur during the shooting phase. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Hanaur Posted February 5, 2015 Report Share Posted February 5, 2015 id anyone look up how the BRB looks at it? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.