Theredknight Posted January 9, 2015 Author Share Posted January 9, 2015 Nusquam- we aren't saying the shield is physically being thrown. A shield isn't a defensive grenade..but a defensive grenade is a defensive grenade, and you can throw those.. Wording is that it counts as having defensive grenades. If it were worded 'a model counts as being equipped with defensive grenades when being charged' then yes, that is clear. But it doesn't say that. Darvel- I agree. But it doesn't say that.. The whole moritat thing was appalling, as it was an extremely over powered unit with it's damage potential. But until it was faq'd finally, people used it how it was worded. I thought it was abused and that arming one up with twin plasmas was downright dirty. But it was legal.. This, in my opinion throwing a blind grenade is legal 100% until it is either faq'd, or written out entirely. To be it's in black and white. Removes charge bonus, and as with defensive grenades, can elect to throw that instead of shooting! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lysere Posted January 9, 2015 Share Posted January 9, 2015 The books, regardless of if they were made post 6th or not still have ruling for 6th edition in them that don't work, don't work as intended etc. "Missile Barrage" literally does nothing now but it has the same wording. There's nothing arbitrary from reading comprehension. If they wanted Breachers to have normal functioning defensive grenades, that they could throw, they would have had them under equipment. Plain and simple. There is no reason to put the rule on the shield. The rule is on the shield though and that tells me that it's supposed to be different from having them equipped normally. From there I inferred that passive ability of negating charge bonuses is applied. Not the ability to throw the shield and cause a blind test. The moment you infer anything it is no longer an argument for RAW, it becomes RAI. I'm sure everyone can agree that RAI they really shouldn't be throwing anything, the problem is that is not how the rule is written. Since the core rules change, and it can be quite difficult to keep all other rulebooks updated with it, stuff like this happens. Rules that were once useful become worthless, rules that did nothing suddenly work, and some rules make for really weird situations. Regardless, the rule is written in such a way that the Breacher squad with the boarding shield counts as having defensive grenades. The only time there is a difference in how "counts as" is mechanically different rule wise from "equipped with" is when something provides a bonus to something a model is equipped with. As an odd example, some characters can make a piece of wargear they are equipped with master crafted. In a situation like that, a model that "counts as" having something wouldn't be able to master craft that item. Other than something like that the two are mechanically the same in regards to how the rules work. Again, the assault launchers on Ironclads are a very good example of this. Ironclads can't fire defensive or assault grenades, but they count as having both "in the assault phase." Without a line like that boarding shields do in fact allow a model to use defensive grenades in the shooting phase. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nusquam Posted January 9, 2015 Share Posted January 9, 2015 This game isn't a court system where letter means everything. Only in it's unnatural environment, tournaments, does it become letter. A place where it isn't designed to be. The inverse of what I mean is true too. The Thanatar didn't have it's Helix Mortar listed under it's profile, but I would never let someone not use it under the claim of RAW. Just like I think Breachers having a blind attack is wrong. If we followed the letter perfectly some units wouldn't work, wargear would be missing and so on. But we use reading comprehension and are able to infer, most of the time, the intent. Some rules, like the Frag Launchers happen to have good, functioning rules. But that doesn't mean every other rule functions correctly. The Lightning has a useless rule because it was designed in 6th, just like Breachers were, and has yet to be updated. Claiming RAW to the max is, at best, a dubious endeavor to begin with. It results in useless rules, missing rules, broken units, and a generally bad time. What's the point of not playing RAI in a friendly game? That doesn't sound very fun. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lysere Posted January 9, 2015 Share Posted January 9, 2015 This game isn't a court system where letter means everything. Only in it's unnatural environment, tournaments, does it become letter. A place where it isn't designed to be. The inverse of what I mean is true too. The Thanatar didn't have it's Helix Mortar listed under it's profile, but I would never let someone not use it under the claim of RAW. Just like I think Breachers having a blind attack is wrong. If we followed the letter perfectly some units wouldn't work, wargear would be missing and so on. But we use reading comprehension and are able to infer, most of the time, the intent. Some rules, like the Frag Launchers happen to have good, functioning rules. But that doesn't mean every other rule functions correctly. The Lightning has a useless rule because it was designed in 6th, just like Breachers were, and has yet to be updated. Claiming RAW to the max is, at best, a dubious endeavor to begin with. It results in useless rules, missing rules, broken units, and a generally bad time. What's the point of not playing RAI in a friendly game? That doesn't sound very fun. I understand that claiming RAW is the best seems flawed, however when discussing rules the only basis we have for anything is the writing. The reason rule discussion is a matter of Rules As Written is because it is important to understand exactly how the rule works as it is written by GW/FW. Not all people are lucky enough to have a local game group, and not all players will follow the same ideas that are established by Rules As Interpreted. This is why RAW is the only rules discussion that matter on the forum. RAI can and will change in various areas, and tournaments may have their own takes on how a rule would work. As much as I agree that no, boarding shields should not allow a model to use a defensive grenade in the shooting phase. The reality is that, as it is written currently, that is exactly what can be done. To claim that doing so may be against the spirit of the game is one thing, but it is in fact entirely legal to do so with how it is written. No amount of interpretation or arguing can change the fact that the breacher squads can currently use defensive grenades just the same as anyone else with zero limitations. Until Forgeworld see fit to FAQ it this fact remains. You can choose to play the game with whatever rules you desire, but nothing any one of us says can change the fact that the rule, as worded, works a specific way. Regardless of the fact that it makes no sense. There was a brief time with the old Templar Codex that they couldn't take drop pods due to a mistake in their FAQ for 6th ed. Despite the fact that any reasonable player would understand that this was nothing more than a mistake, the tournament scene didn't follow that. So before it got fixed, any Templar who wanted to use drop pods was unable to do so given how the Rules were Written at the time. It was illogical, but being illogical doesn't exempt people from having to follow it in a tournament setting. So again, since everyone who plays this game needs some basis to follow, RAW is the only thing that matters with how a rule functions. It is the only thing that can actually be defended if someone questions it. I still see this come up with issuing and accepting challenges. People constantly miss the single line towards the bottom of the paragraph that explains that 'unengaged models' can't accept or issue challenges. If someone doesn't believe me I have to be able to show them exactly how I am right. Anything established by RAI is unable to do that, and thus will never hold in a serious rules discussion. Sorry for the Rant, but I see this a lot. As much as I dislike the tournament scene it is important to understand that RAW is what matters outside of people you know. My local group still play using a lot of the old classifications of cover. Forests, area terrain, ruins, we use them all the same way we did in 6th even though some of the rules for them have simply vanished. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Adra'Melek Posted January 9, 2015 Share Posted January 9, 2015 Of course the funny thing is that Shroud Bombs (the point of which is to effectively blind the opposition and are Bombs) most definitely cannot be used as a blind Attack. Personally I see it as boarding shields coming win defensive grenades. The idea of a big defensive shield coming with defensive grenades isn't stupid or outlandish and it fits the RAW. I DON'T think they throw their shields. Although every is free to run it any way they and their opposition decide. I don't actually have any Boarding shields. Edit: @Lysere, there'so nothing wrong with debating a good interpretation of the rules that doesn't HAVE to be RAW. It could be "this doesn't make sense to me, what do you think? What would be a good way of doing it?" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Theredknight Posted January 9, 2015 Author Share Posted January 9, 2015 Lysere - I agree and that's why I posted this up! I just called it as I saw it, I'm glad you agree. And I didn't know that about challenges, I shall re read the section! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Theredknight Posted January 10, 2015 Author Share Posted January 10, 2015 Ok so a few days ago I sent a query about this, this was the reply I received this morning: Hi Ben. That is correct. The Boarding Shield sets that we sell actually come with small grenade launchers to represent this. If there is anything further we can do to assist you, or if you have any queries about the information we have requested or provided, please telephone us. Regards, Forge World If you have a query about your order, please call 0115 900 4995 within the UK 011 44 115 900 4995 from the US and Canada 00 44 115 900 4995 from much of Europe Our office hours are: 0930 – 1800 (GMT) Monday to Friday 0930 – 1700 (GMT) Saturday Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slips Posted January 10, 2015 Share Posted January 10, 2015 Well :cuss ; hahaha NEVER noticed those grenade launchers. Welp, since forgeworld says we can; we can. Phalanx Warders and Breachers just got a bit better. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Theredknight Posted January 10, 2015 Author Share Posted January 10, 2015 Is that the tiny little thing top centre? Well I guess how it can be interpreted doesn't matter, fw say it is and you can throw them. It's a good idea though that the shield actually has it installed.itd make it more effective than throwing them for sure. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slips Posted January 10, 2015 Share Posted January 10, 2015 Yeah, I think its that...y'know anatomical body part looking thing right under/beside the slot for the <Ranged Weapon of Choice>. Although, it does look small for a 'nade launcher...and how do you load the thing? ...eh Semantics. At least we have an official answer now. Maybe if they had made the Grenade Launcher in the shield more obvious we wouldn't have had this problem in the first place? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Raktra Posted January 10, 2015 Share Posted January 10, 2015 Pfft, I played Warmachine for three years. If the Man-O-War shields could fire friggin' cannon shells at their size, I'm fine with nipple grenades. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChainMachete Posted January 13, 2015 Share Posted January 13, 2015 That is correct. The Boarding Shield sets that we sell actually come with small grenade launchers to represent this. I always thought that was a camera. The Black Library shortish story about the battle for Phall (can't remember what it was called, wonder if there will also be followup battles for Vindaloo & Madras), mentions that there's a camera. So when the shields are walled together, the marines can still see what's on the other side. No fluff there about grenade launchers though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Millicant Posted January 13, 2015 Share Posted January 13, 2015 Earlier on in this discussion, I also emailed Forgeworld. I got the same response - they are intended to be able to throw (by whatever means) defensive grenades. They also mentioned that it would be included in an upcoming FAQ. I stand corrected. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Theredknight Posted January 13, 2015 Author Share Posted January 13, 2015 Earlier on in this discussion, I also emailed Forgeworld. I got the same response - they are intended to be able to throw (by whatever means) defensive grenades. They also mentioned that it would be included in an upcoming FAQ. I stand corrected. Said the man in the orthopaedic shoes Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nusquam Posted January 13, 2015 Share Posted January 13, 2015 FW emailed me back: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slips Posted January 13, 2015 Share Posted January 13, 2015 ...welp back to square one it seems.. House Ruling it is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lysere Posted January 13, 2015 Share Posted January 13, 2015 E-mails are similar to house rules. Regardless of what they say in them they don't carry over to the table top. We still need an FAQ to change things. Go figure not even Forgeworld agrees on how to use it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Millicant Posted January 14, 2015 Share Posted January 14, 2015 Bwahahaha!!! Ah well. I guess it comes down to how you want to play it. That's pretty much the way 40k should be anyway, in my opinion. So I will proceed however I desire. :) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Theredknight Posted January 14, 2015 Author Share Posted January 14, 2015 Strange that it would be completely opposite, you'd think they'd talk about that in the office. Well, use them how you want,i guess, I will be using them, it's written there, and it's 2/1 on emails Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lysere Posted January 14, 2015 Share Posted January 14, 2015 Strange that it would be completely opposite, you'd think they'd talk about that in the office. Well, use them how you want,i guess, I will be using them, it's written there, and it's 2/1 on emails This is normal actually, if you call GWs customer support with a rules question you'll have any number of opinions come up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nusquam Posted January 19, 2015 Share Posted January 19, 2015 I got an unexpected email from FW: Hi, Apologies for this but please disregard our previous email. I have since discovered that the answer is yes! As the shield itself contains a small grenade launcher! If there is anything further we can do to assist you, or if you have any queries about the information we have requested or provided, please telephone us.Regards, Forge World Going in the next FAQ for sure at this point ha. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Raktra Posted January 19, 2015 Share Posted January 19, 2015 Huh, well there's a thing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Theredknight Posted January 19, 2015 Author Share Posted January 19, 2015 Yeah, to be fair forgeworlds customer support is second to none. To even email you back about your query a couple of weeks after you asked it, is pretty astonishing (in a good way) Il imagine it will be in a future faq if that is the case. Boarding shields for everybody! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slips Posted January 19, 2015 Share Posted January 19, 2015 /oprah AND YOU GET A BOARDING SHIELD!AND YOU GET A BOARDING SHIELD! ERREHBORREH GETS A BOARDING SHIELD!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Raktra Posted January 19, 2015 Share Posted January 19, 2015 And people called me mad for taking them over Tactical Marines. Mad, they said, mad! WELL WHO'S MAD NOW, BLIND PEOPLE? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.