Land raider popping smoke?

[SeattleDV8]

There are two sides

Side A) 0+1=1 always!!

Problem with this is things like Dire Avengers, say they use Bladestorm (and may not fire in the following shooting phase), in their next turn can they use Bladestorm again to add +1 to their "may not fire", and each shoot once?

Its the same logic.

Side B ) The rule lists the only time you can use PotMS.

as stated above this is only implied.

 

So when faced with two valid interpertations I tend to play the weaker, in this case no shooting after smoke.

[thade]

It's not the same logic at all with Bladestorm as it says, specifically, you can't fire in your following shooting phase. PotMS says "you may fire one more weapon than you would otherwise be allowed to fire." These mean very different things.

 

RAW is pretty clear here. If the LR can fire no guns, it can fire one gun per PotMS; I can't imagine a TO not letting that fly. In fact, I've seen that very interpretation used againt me (LRs with smoke firing) multiple times. It's really not so bad. =P

[Ming]

"you may fire one more weapon than you would otherwise be allowed to fire"

 

You have the raider with POTMS.

 

You are (be) allowed to fire in the current situation, but not everything.

 

You can fire one more weapon than you can (be). Because you are (be) allowed.

[thade]

"you may fire one more weapon than you would otherwise be allowed to fire"

 

You have the raider with POTMS.

 

You are (be) allowed to fire in the current situation, but not everything.

 

You can fire one more weapon than you can (be). Because you are (be) allowed.

 

What?

 

When you pop smoke, you are not allowed to fire.

 

How many guns are you allowed to fire? None.

 

PotMS lets you fire how may more guns? One.

 

How many can we fire when we pop smoke, using PotMS? One.

 

What are we not following here?

[Grey Mage]

Hes attempting to say that when it says non that it disallows all shooting, PotMS or no.

 

What hes lacking is proof that 0+1 =/= 1

[thade]

Let's all be grateful that no one can prove that. @_@

[SeattleDV8]

It's not the same logic at all with Bladestorm as it says, specifically, you can't fire in your following shooting phase. PotMS says "you may fire one more weapon than you would otherwise be allowed to fire." These mean very different things.

 

Sorry but you're not really trying to say they are different?

I hope you are not because this would make it look like your arguing for an Easter Egg.

 

BRB pg. 62 "...may not fire any of its weapons in the same turn as it used smoke launchers"

PotMS "...can fire one more weapon than would normally be permitted."

 

Bladestorm ""The exarch and his squad may choose to add one to the number of shots they each fire with their shuriken weapons that turn."

 

The two rules are almost identical, and the argument is the same.

From a pure logical state if you allow the PotMS to fire after smoke you would also have to allow the DA to Bladestorm for 0+1=1.

[pingo]

It's not the same logic at all with Bladestorm as it says, specifically, you can't fire in your following shooting phase. PotMS says "you may fire one more weapon than you would otherwise be allowed to fire." These mean very different things.

 

Sorry but you're not really trying to say they are different?

I hope you are not because this would make it look like your arguing for an Easter Egg.

 

BRB pg. 62 "...may not fire any of its weapons in the same turn as it used smoke launchers"

PotMS "...can fire one more weapon than would normally be permitted."

 

Bladestorm ""The exarch and his squad may choose to add one to the number of shots they each fire with their shuriken weapons that turn."

 

The two rules are almost identical, and the argument is the same.

From a pure logical state if you allow the PotMS to fire after smoke you would also have to allow the DA to Bladestorm for 0+1=1.

 

The second Dire Avenger one is different because if they can fire no shots then they have nothing to add one to. If they have no shots to fire, then they can't add one to it.

 

Also, Codex overrules rulebook, so it doesn't matter what the rule book says about never being able to fire weapons when using smoke if a codex is changing the rules for vehicle shooting.

[Acebaur]

Another thing that everyone seems to be forgetting is that 40K is a permissive ruleset. Just because it doesn't say you can't do something doesn't mean you can. It's not just an example because there are only 3 occasions when you can't shoot, 1) shaken/stunned, 2) moved more than 6" and are not fast, and 3) popped smoke. They list the first two as times when you can do it. They leave out the 3rd time because it's not a list of examples but a list of restrictions.

[Grey Mage]

Not true, dont forget deepstriking.

 

40k isnt entirely a permissive rules set either- there are plenty of examples throughout the main rulebook alone. They are there to show us how a rule is to be interpretted, not to define the only time it can be used.

 

Example: We know that when your deploying in DoW that its 2 troops units and an HQ, and that transports take up the same slot as the unit they were purchased for. Because they gave an example. That example helps show us applications of the rules, NOT that the only time a transport for a troops unit counts as a troop itself is when its purchased for a tactical squad.

 

Again, lets look at the rules:

For smoke launchers: 'The vehicle may not fire any of its weapons in the same turn as it used its smoke launchers, ....'

For cruising speed: 'Vehicles that moved at cruising speed may not fire.'

And for PotMS: 'A Landraider can fire one more weapon than would be normally permitted.'

 

We know it can fire while at cruising speed, and smoke launchers use the same phrasing. 'The vehicle may not fire'.

 

If it works for one, there is simply no good reason for it not to work on the other.

[JamesI]

Let's all be grateful that no one can prove that. @_@

I had a physics student prove 0=1 on a test. Didn't even realize his answer was wrong too.

[Acebaur]

Not true, dont forget deepstriking.

 

Deepstriking vehicles count as moving at crusing speed, which is coverd in the PotMS rule

 

40k isnt entirely a permissive rules set either- there are plenty of examples throughout the main rulebook alone. They are there to show us how a rule is to be interpretted, not to define the only time it can be used.

 

Example: We know that when your deploying in DoW that its 2 troops units and an HQ, and that transports take up the same slot as the unit they were purchased for. Because they gave an example. That example helps show us applications of the rules, NOT that the only time a transport for a troops unit counts as a troop itself is when its purchased for a tactical squad.

 

I know there are plenty of examples in the BRB and they all either begin with "For example" or end with "etc.." indicating there is more than what they gave inluding your DoW scenario above.

 

The BT PotMS rule says that I can use it "in addition to any weaponry that can normally fire" Does that mean I can shoot my Assault cannon twice? What about taking a BT master crafted CC weapon? Can I re-roll a re-roll? No, these things are not allowed, despite the rules suggesting otherwise. It's the same thing, as the PotMS, they didn't expressly forbid it, but they didn't give you persmission either. And since there is no "for example" or "etc.." then we can only assume that those are only times you can use it, especially when there is only one other time not listed.

[thade]

PotMS is not an "Easter Egg". It does make me wonder what tournaments you all play at where they refuse PotMS firing from Smoke though. ;) Maybe you will refrain from character attacks here and focus instead on reading the books you are citing.

 

Let's look more closely at the Bladestorm rule. Let us recall that rules in codecies override rules in the BRB; because that's what differentiates our armies from one another and why codecies exist.

 

"The Exarch and his squad may choose to add one to the number of shots they each fire with their shuriken weapons that turn. If they do so they may not fire in the subsequent shooting phase as they reload."

In this case, the rule is pretty that you can't fire in a turn subsequent to a turn in which you used Bladestorm. You need to fire to benefit from the Bladestorm rule, and the Bladestorm rule says you can't fire...so if you can't fire, you can't use Bladestorm. Make sense? I hope so. NOW by it's writing, if you have NOT used Bladestorm in the previous turn, you can certainly choose to fire ZERO guns in the unit and I guess each will fire once with Bladestorm. Now they've each fired one shot (with Assault 2 weapons) and can't fire in the next turn. May all Eldar use their Dire Avengers in this way. Please note that this is in no way overriding a BRB rule (as codex rules are allowed to do). Let me repeat that the Bladestorm rule itself says, specifically, that you may not fire in the subsequent phase.

 

The Smoke rule is in the BRB. PotMS is in a codex. PotMS is allowed to override a BRB rule because it's in a codex, and that's what codecies do. Smoke says we can fire none of our guns the same turn in which we pop smoke. PotMS says we're always allowed to fire one more gun than we'd otherwise be allowed to. PotMS overrides the smoke rule. Unlike Bladestorm, the PotMS rule does not prevent you from using it turn after turn. Nothing in PotMS says with any specificity what you are not allowed to do with it.

 

These two rules look remarkably different to me.

[thade]

The BT PotMS rule says that I can use it "in addition to any weaponry that can normally fire" Does that mean I can shoot my Assault cannon twice?

 

Nope, as you can only fire each gun once per BRB, and to override the BRB in that way it'd specifically have to say "You can use this to fire a single weapon on the LR twice" or something else to that degree. One more weapon than normally allowed refers to how many weapons a vehicle is allowed to fire out of it's given payload, and the examples in PotMS certainly point to this.

 

What about taking a BT master crafted CC weapon? Can I re-roll a re-roll? No, these things are not allowed, despite the rules suggesting otherwise.

 

Because the BRB states you can't re-roll a re-roll. However, if a codex rule came along and specifically said "You may re-roll this re-roll once" or something, you'd be able to do it. Why? Because, the codex can override the BRB.

 

It's the same thing, as the PotMS, they didn't expressly forbid it, but they didn't give you persmission either. And since there is no "for example" or "etc.." then we can only assume that those are only times you can use it, especially when there is only one other time not listed.

 

The rules in the BRB that PotMS does override are the rules with regards to how many weapons it can fire in a turn. While the PotMS rule doesn't say "for example" or "etc." it does say "Therefore" which means "As a consequence [of this]"; the list that follows need not be exhaustive, and since it need not be exhaustive, it's not on us to assume that it is. To do so is RAI, and that's beyond the scope of this discussion. RAW remains clear. You blow smoke. You can pewpew with one gun. I recommend you do. <3 People will do so at Ard Boyz against you, and the TO will not shut them down.

[Styrofoam04]

I'm pretty new to the game, but i just read the Rulebook and I believe that everyone is missing a major point. Smoke launchers are triggered the the movement phase

 

"Once per game, after completing its move, a vehicle with smoke launchers can trigger them... The

vehicle may not fire any of its weapons In the same turn as it used its smoke launchers,"

 

Therefore during the shooting phase you cant shoot. How do you fire if you cant see!

[Acebaur]

The BT PotMS rule says that I can use it "in addition to any weaponry that can normally fire" Does that mean I can shoot my Assault cannon twice?

 

Nope, as you can only fire each gun once per BRB, and to override the BRB in that way it'd specifically have to say "You can use this to fire a single weapon on the LR twice" or something else to that degree. One more weapon than normally allowed refers to how many weapons a vehicle is allowed to fire out of it's given payload, and the examples in PotMS certainly point to this.

 

What page number would that be on? I challenge you to find it because I have yet to see it. We actually had a discussion about it in the BT forum. You say that it would have to specifically say I that I can do so, well the PotMS rule specifically says when you can override the BRB. It doesn't list popping smoke as one of those options. Thank you, you just made my arguement stronger

 

What about taking a BT master crafted CC weapon? Can I re-roll a re-roll? No, these things are not allowed, despite the rules suggesting otherwise.

 

Because the BRB states you can't re-roll a re-roll. However, if a codex rule came along and specifically said "You may re-roll this re-roll once" or something, you'd be able to do it. Why? Because, the codex can override the BRB.

 

My MC entry doesn't say "you must accept the second result" It simply says you can re-roll one failled hit per turn. A failed hit is a failt hit whether you re-rolled it or not. I'm not saying you can do this(because I think you can't) but I 'm trying to point other instances where the codex or BRB doesn't say no, but doesn't say yes either.

 

It's the same thing, as the PotMS, they didn't expressly forbid it, but they didn't give you persmission either. And since there is no "for example" or "etc.." then we can only assume that those are only times you can use it, especially when there is only one other time not listed.

 

The rules in the BRB that PotMS does override are the rules with regards to how many weapons it can fire in a turn. While the PotMS rule doesn't say "for example" or "etc." it does say "Therefore" which means "As a consequence [of this]"; the list that follows need not be exhaustive, and since it need not be exhaustive, it's not on us to assume that it is. To do so is RAI, and that's beyond the scope of this discussion. RAW remains clear. You blow smoke. You can pewpew with one gun. I recommend you do. <3 People will do so at Ard Boyz against you, and the TO will not shut them down.

 

yeah, "As consequence[of this]", these are the only times you can do this. Also a lot of tournaments both local and national are adopting the INAT as their FAQ. Just so you know, the INAT says that, no, you cannot pop smoke and shoot a weapon with PotMS

[JamesI]

Acebuar, on one of your points

 

The BRB says very specifically that you can never reroll a reroll.

[thade]

What JamesI said.

 

Consider this for a moment: every tactical marine comes with a boltgun and a boltpistol. Can he fire both weapons in the same shooting phase? Nope; it's bollocks. Why is it that it's bollocks? An unwritten rule that has been a part of 40k for years: each model can only choose one of it's weapons to fire each turn. This is a "two-hands only" rule, which was abandoned in text but still holds true in practice. A model can't fire his boltgun and his boltpistol in the same phase because he can only fire one of his weapons, and he has to CHOOSE which one.

 

This next part is where people get confused, and it has to do with the way GW organized the BRB. The three phases are described in each their own chapters: Movement, Shooting, and Assaults. The Vehicle chapter lists how vehicles differ from other (GW would say "basic") model types; it's a chapter of exceptions to the basic rules. Anything not specifically listed as an exception in the Vehicle chapter can be presumed to work as it did before. (i.e. it's not an exception.)

 

Vehicles that remain stationary can fire "all" of their weapons; the choice of the word "all" here may mislead, but I don't think it often does. It really means "each [of its weapons once]".

 

If you agree so far on the following points

- An infantry model, unless otherwise stated in its codex entry, can fire only one of it's weapons per Shooting Phase.

- A vehicle, unless otherwise stated in its codex entry, can fire each of it's weapons per Shooting Phase - only once each - if it has remained Stationary.

then we can continue. If you don't, well, your error lies there.

 

PotMS says you can fire one more weapon than you would otherwise be allowed to. One more weapon out of the set of weapons the vehicle has. In no way does this imply you can re-fire a weapon in the same phase, and my interpretation of the rule does not infer this at all.

 

The PotMS rule overrides the BRB in precisely the way it says: you can fire one more weapon than you'd usually be allowed to. If it remained stationary, it can fire each of its guns once, without using PotMS. If it moved at 6", it's able to fire one weapon and all defensive weapons; PotMS further allows another weapon to be fired. If you pop smoke, you are allowed to fire zero guns. PotMS allows you to fire one gun.

[thade]

yeah, "As consequence[of this]", these are the only times you can do this.

 

That last part where you infer "these are the only times you can do this" is where you are getting into RAI. They didn't say these are the only times, nor did they say it was an exhaustive list. It's a subset of examples. You can't expect them to list everything possible with every rule they write; that's not how these kinds of games work.

 

Also a lot of tournaments both local and national are adopting the INAT as their FAQ. Just so you know, the INAT says that, no, you cannot pop smoke and shoot a weapon with PotMS

 

GW-sanctioned tournies don't do this round these parts. As they make the game, I'll stick to their rules and (however infrequent) FAQs. INAT allows a lot of mind-boggling stuff (like allowing Doom to target models in a vehicle and allow them an obscured cover save...how RAI can you get?), so I'm grateful it's not widespread.

[Ming]

Let Z = 1 if smoke not fired; Z=0 if smoke fired.

 

X = number of guns that will fire (variable) according to vehicle movement rate (specific to vehicle loadout)

 

Y = POTMS function. If has then = 1; if not = 0

 

POTMS = 1

 

A = firepower of vehicle

 

A=Z(X+Y[POTMS])

 

For Rhino, equation becomes

 

A=Z(X)

 

For Landraider, equation becomes

 

A=Z(X+1)

 

If smoke,

 

A=0

[thade]

Smoke says you're not allowed to fire any guns. When your'e not allowed to fire any, you're allowed to fire none (zero). One more than none (or zero) is one. You may fire one gun with PotMS. Nothing yet offered denies this; RAW it's clear and fine.

 

This isn't going to go away, I suspect, as several of you simply aren't satisfied with Occam's razor. And at this stage neither side has offered anything new to the argument for a while, so we may need to agree to disagree, barring contributions external to the handful of us that have been beating on this recently.

[Morticon]

Let Z = 1 if smoke not fired; Z=0 if smoke fired.

 

X = number of guns that will fire (variable) according to vehicle movement rate (specific to vehicle loadout)

 

Y = POTMS function. If has then = 1; if not = 0

 

POTMS = 1

 

A = firepower of vehicle

 

A=Z(X+Y[POTMS])

 

For Rhino, equation becomes

 

A=Z(X)

 

For Landraider, equation becomes

 

A=Z(X+1)

 

If smoke,

 

A=0

 

I failed math - but why are you multiplying Z by anything? Surely thats cheating to get your zero ? It should be A = Z + (X+Y[POTMS]) no ?

[Grey Mage]

What hes saying is that if Z=0 then A=0, but its not mathematically proven.

 

Why? Because we dont know the rules work like that. This isnt a computer game, 40k is not solid math. There is no equation in the BRB, and his only shows what he thinks of the situation.

[Morticon]

What hes saying is that if Z=0 then A=0, but its not mathematically proven.

 

Why? Because we dont know the rules work like that. This isnt a computer game, 40k is not solid math. There is no equation in the BRB, and his only shows what he thinks of the situation.

 

cheers got ya :(

[SeattleDV8]

PotMS is not an "Easter Egg". It does make me wonder what tournaments you all play at where they refuse PotMS firing from Smoke though. Maybe you will refrain from character attacks here and focus instead on reading the books you are citing.

That was not a personal attack, if you look again you see I was giving you the benefit of doubt.

Tournament rulings are always at the whim of the judges and tournament (like the INAT) and have no standing in a rules debate.

 

Your argument lacks logic consistency.

 

In this case, the rule is pretty that you can't fire in a turn subsequent to a turn in which you used Bladestorm. You need to fire to benefit from the Bladestorm rule, and the Bladestorm rule says you can't fire...so if you can't fire, you can't use Bladestorm. Make sense? I hope so. NOW by it's writing, if you have NOT used Bladestorm in the previous turn, you can certainly choose to fire ZERO guns in the unit and I guess each will fire once with Bladestorm. Now they've each fired one shot (with Assault 2 weapons) and can't fire in the next turn. May all Eldar use their Dire Avengers in this way. Please note that this is in no way overriding a BRB rule (as codex rules are allowed to do). Let me repeat that the Bladestorm rule itself says, specifically, that you may not fire in the subsequent phase.

Not at all. Smoke disallows firing any weapon ,if you can't fire any weapon you can't fire. But you say that PotMS then allows a shot.

Codex> BRB right?? ( generally true but it is really specific > general)

Considering that the rule that allows them to fire +1 shots is also in the same Codex by your logic it would also over-rule the "no shooting"in the earlier rule.

Both disallow any shooting/firing in the next turn/firing phase, both allow +1 to the number of shots that can be fired.

 

The Smoke rule is in the BRB. PotMS is in a codex. PotMS is allowed to override a BRB rule because it's in a codex, and that's what codecies do. Smoke says we can fire none of our guns the same turn in which we pop smoke. PotMS says we're always allowed to fire one more gun than we'd otherwise be allowed to. PotMS overrides the smoke rule. Unlike Bladestorm, the PotMS rule does not prevent you from using it turn after turn. Nothing in PotMS says with any specificity what you are not allowed to do with it.

Which is the problem, you do not have the specific over-rule in the case of smoke.

Movement and shaken/stunned are specificly mentioned.