Page 27...

[Gealgain]

At my LGS I caused quite a stir when I used my ravenwing speeder to capture an objective. My opponent cried bull$}*+ so loud and so fast everyone else stopped thier games (shop owner even broke from his wow coma to see what was going on) my arguments were simple:

 

codex trumps Rulebook

page 27 states that ravenwing speeder are "separate scoring units"

I had even taken sammael to use this rule to make it a troop unit so it was legal on all fronts

 

the local rulesmonger had seen this rule before. He cited that even though the term "scoring" is used,

that the DA codex suffers from "rules lag" and that scoring units meant something different in an old edition.

 

End result- The LGS doesn't allow the RAS landspeeders to be scoring units. Is this right?

[Lord_Hail]

if you take Samuel, then the speeder is scoring, thought the ravenwing unit containing the speeder can't outflake, because the speeder makes them lose ablilty to. It is adressed in the new faq i belive. Also point out we are not codex marines, each chapter has something that makes them diffrent, this happens to be one of ours.

[Chaplain Lucifer]

Rules lag maybe, but by RAW yes, they are scoring units.

[Lion El Jason]

It is a scoring unit.

 

Point out that we have had 3 FAQs since 5th ed was released and none changed this rule.

Also point out that the Combat Squad rule for Devastators, scouts, assault and veterans was erratad to stop them being scoring.

These two points prove that the intent is to have scoring landspeeders and attack bikes or they would have been changed.

 

Finally point out that DA have only one troops option, thus it has special rules for a fast attack choice to make it scoring.

This is identical to taking Pedro Cantor: He makes an elites choice scoring.

 

By the correct rules the Landspeeder and Attack Bike are always scoring units even if you take them as fast attack or if you don't take Sammael at all!

[Gealgain]

All valid points, especially the 3 FAQs... I didn't even think about the fact that gw has had 3 chances to clarify and they haven't. Fluff wise, ravenwing are the original masters of landspeeders. So mastering scoring would fit.

I'm bringing back my army from last time and playing it as it's written anyways!

[HsojVvad]

Don't forget to mention that DA Bikes can't turbo boost while it scouts. If RW Speeder isn't a scoring unit, the you can have a turbo boosting bike to help out your 1st turn Deep Striking Termies then.

[shabbadoo]

By the correct rules the Landspeeder and Attack Bike are always scoring units even if you take them as fast attack or if you don't take Sammael at all!

 

The FAQ changed that.

 

 

If the LGS is not going to allow Land Speeders to claim objectives, due to rules update, then they also should allow RW bikes to turbo boost when making a scout move, as that this the most up-to-date rules change too. In the core rule book that is, not the codex. If they don't then their douche-baggery doesn't go both ways and so they are just pick-and-choose rules douche bags.

[Tanhausen]

I have the same issue in a local club... and for peace's sake, I just don't take LS in RAS :P

 

But yes: as per rules, they should score.

[ValourousHeart]

Yeah it is simply a case of cherry picking.

They want to hold us to every restriction by claiming that codex trumps BRB, but they also want to take away any advantage we have by saying that the term scoring is some how foot noted with a reference back to the 4th ed BRB.

 

Honestly it is all a load of crap... they have no proof, just their opinions... and you have it written in black and white.

[Lion El Jason]

By the correct rules the Landspeeder and Attack Bike are always scoring units even if you take them as fast attack or if you don't take Sammael at all!

 

The FAQ changed that.

 

 

Where? I can't see any changes to the page 27 rule.

Note the RAS Combat Squads has nothing to do with the P23 change.

[Isiah]

By the correct rules the Landspeeder and Attack Bike are always scoring units even if you take them as fast attack or if you don't take Sammael at all!

 

The FAQ changed that.

 

 

Where? I can't see any changes to the page 27 rule.

Note the RAS Combat Squads has nothing to do with the P23 change.

 

LEJ is right. RAS speeders are (should) still be played as scoring as per RAW.

 

Note: it is only the RAS speeders that count as scoring (and even if Sammy isn't present) and not Support Squadron speeders that are never scoring but can contest. That is something that can often cause confusion amongst those not familiar with the DA Codex.

 

Cheers

I

[Lion El Jason]

Aah good. I should also say that, well in my opinion anyway, its particularly bad form not to tell an opponent who is unfamiliar with the codex at the start that your fast attack choices can be scoring (Or for that matter that your bikes or terminators are troops and hence scoring).

 

I think this avoids issues as at the start of the game its something that they find out at the time as a quirk of the DA codex... at the end of the game they may as well question it if its pulled as a surprise since it probably decides who wins the game!

[Isiah]

Aah good. I should also say that, well in my opinion anyway, its particularly bad form not to tell an opponent who is unfamiliar with the codex at the start that your fast attack choices can be scoring (Or for that matter that your bikes or terminators are troops and hence scoring).

 

I think this avoids issues as at the start of the game its something that they find out at the time as a quirk of the DA codex... at the end of the game they may as well question it if its pulled as a surprise since it probably decides who wins the game!

 

Totally agree.

[krewl]

This is identical to taking Pedro Cantor: He makes an elites choice scoring.

- This sets the precedent that stuff that by rulebook does not score CAN score when stated in a codex. If RW speeders do not score pedro's goons do not score.

- Several FAQ releases did NOT adres this issue as stated.

- Other definitions making e.g. devastator units scoring WHERE fixed in these FAQ's (including the current) indicating GW was aware of the extra scroing units issue in the DA codex.

 

So you are very much in the clear and correct that the RAS speeders score.

 

Just do not let them cherrypick what should be updated to their benefit and then just turboboost your bikes up their front door and DWA Belial + 5 TH SS termies with Feal no pain in their deployment zone. (More units would be better here.)

Not to be a rules bending annoying person but to show them that they must choose either one side or the other and consistent with that choice.

 

It always Irks me when I am faced with that issue as you always have to defend the fact your codex does something.

I don't have to start telling necron players that We'll be back is outdated, or Eldar that the basic rulesbook allows for 24"vehicle speed max so star engines should not do anything or whatever kind of other codex rule.

 

Why is it always the same discussion for the DA speeders then? It just rubs me the wrong way.

[breng77]

Just point out that you had to pay 320 points minimum to get that scoring speeder, that might help a bit.

[minionboy]

I personally don't play them as scoring when taken from a RAS from Fast Attack. To me, this is just common sense, although not RAW (which often requires the suspension of common sense). After all, why would the speeder and attack bike be scoring when the rest of the unit isn't? Just by that alone, it has saved many arguments. I think it is extremely clear what the intentions of the rule are, especially when considering what a scoring unit used to be, compared to what it is now.

 

I know the RAW crowd will disagree, and often I'm on the very strict RAW side of the argument, but sometimes you have to use your brain instead of a book. I also wouldn't argue with an opponent who did use them as scoring, but I'd definitely consider a few things before playing against them a second time.

[HsojVvad]

I personally don't play them as scoring when taken from a RAS from Fast Attack. To me, this is just common sense, although not RAW (which often requires the suspension of common sense). After all, why would the speeder and attack bike be scoring when the rest of the unit isn't? Just by that alone, it has saved many arguments. I think it is extremely clear what the intentions of the rule are, especially when considering what a scoring unit used to be, compared to what it is now.

 

I know the RAW crowd will disagree, and often I'm on the very strict RAW side of the argument, but sometimes you have to use your brain instead of a book. I also wouldn't argue with an opponent who did use them as scoring, but I'd definitely consider a few things before playing against them a second time.

Common sense? Common sense would dictate that GW would say NO, RW Speeders are not scoring. It has been over 2 years no with 5th edtion. With 3 FAQs for 5th edtion, not once was the RW Speeder ever mentioned for not scoring. Other DA 4th edtion scoring units became not scoring, but no where did GS say that the RW speeder isn't scoring. So common sense would tell you that it is scoring.

 

Please don't insult us in telling us what is clear intentions and what was scoring and what is scoring now. If it was clear we wouldn't be having this debate now would we?

[minionboy]

Common sense? Common sense would dictate that GW would say NO, RW Speeders are not scoring. It has been over 2 years no with 5th edtion. With 3 FAQs for 5th edtion, not once was the RW Speeder ever mentioned for not scoring. Other DA 4th edtion scoring units became not scoring, but no where did GS say that the RW speeder isn't scoring. So common sense would tell you that it is scoring.

 

Please don't insult us in telling us what is clear intentions and what was scoring and what is scoring now. If it was clear we wouldn't be having this debate now would we?

 

By no means was I intending to insult you, and actually if you read my post, I agreed that RAW clearly states that they're scoring. But that aside, the definition of what scoring is has changed in the years and with a book that is as out of date as the DA book, it takes a bit beyond yelling and pointing at the words in the book.

 

The argument that the lack of an FAQ means that GW intended it to work that way is a poor argument that it must be their intention. Neither of us know GW's intentions and it's foolish for anyone to claim to know that. You could have argued that GW never intended for 'nid weapons to stack, and you would be wrong because they clarified that later in an FAQ; so like I said, just because it's not in the FAQ now, doesn't mean that GW intends for it to work that way.

 

Think about this argument and tell me if it sounds familiar: you tell a kid to stop throwing rocks, and then they start throwing sticks, their argument will be that you never said there was anything wrong with throwing sticks, so you must have intended for them to throw sticks all along. Not the best example, but it was the first one to come off the top of my head.

 

Again, I'll reiterate that strictly RAW, they are scoring, I never said otherwise, but when you're playing a game with as many rules and as many out-dated rules as 40k, the application of discretion or common sense has to be used, unless you don't like having friends.

[Alys Dwr]

the application of discretion or common sense has to be used, unless you don't like having friends.

This is always the best way to go IMO, but RAI is a subjective thing which can vary drastically depending on who is winning. The "issues" with the DA codex only ever become a problem when your oponent is a sore loser, but the same can be said of any exploited rule in any codex.

 

Al

[Lion El Jason]

Personally I think the intent is clear and I don't like the implication that having scoring speeders is in any way abuse, exploiting an out of date rule, a loophole or anything else.

That is basically saying its next to cheating.

 

Its obvious that its RAW and quite clear that GW intends it to stay this way (Whether or not they intended it that way to begin with). I think it is quite insulting to have anyone say the way I play Ravenwing is "abusive" or "exploiting a rule".

 

Its not crystal clear or we wouldn't be having the discussion, but calling in to question the integrity of the player is not really acceptable. The discussion should be about the rule, not the players using it or not.

[minionboy]

Personally I think the intent is clear and I don't like the implication that having scoring speeders is in any way abuse, exploiting an out of date rule, a loophole or anything else.

That is basically saying its next to cheating.

 

Its obvious that its RAW and quite clear that GW intends it to stay this way (Whether or not they intended it that way to begin with). I think it is quite insulting to have anyone say the way I play Ravenwing is "abusive" or "exploiting a rule".

 

Its not crystal clear or we wouldn't be having the discussion, but calling in to question the integrity of the player is not really acceptable. The discussion should be about the rule, not the players using it or not.

 

I am not questioning your integrity, I'm questioning the logic of your argument.

 

You begin your reply again with stating that you (above all others) understand what their intent, which I've explained, neither you or I can possibly know GW's intentions. You then compare your knowledge of their intentions to your integrity, which is where you may feel like you are being insulted.

 

Now that neither of us know GW's intentions, we have to draw our own conclusions. The quick and simple way is to just use RAW even though the definition of "scoring unit" has changed throughout the editions. The other way to approach the problem is to take a step back and really take a look at how the rule is written, how the new edition works, and the changes between the new and old editions.

 

If you read the whole sentence containing the rule in question, it begins with, "Much like combat squads..." Now, we know it's not literally saying they are combat squads, but with that introduction, a conclusion can be drawn that the author was describing how the unit works and drawing a comparison to combat squads. The author continues to explain that unlike combat squads, they always split off (you don't have a choice) and continues to call them "independent scoring units." At the time the book was written, combat squads of any kind were scoring units due to how the rules worked in 4e, the last part of the sentence was reiteration of the rule, presumably to prevent questions about it.

 

So now, if you're trying to analyze how that sentence was intended to be taken, there are two main options:

A ) The author intended them to be scoring for all time, regardless of rules changes in newer editions.

B ) The author intended them to be scoring and to follow the way the core rules were written at the time.

 

Anyhow, I'm pretty much through arguing, take from this what you will.

[Howloutloud]

RAW states that speeders are scoring (granted only those from the attack squad). The FAQ has backed it up 3 times. So now we need to take a look at the possibilities of RAI.

 

Most would argue that with 5th edition GW wanted only infantry models from the troops. However the wording is "An army's scoring units are all the units that come from its troop allowance" It does state that of the three exceptions, one is vehicles...

 

HAHA!!!! some people would say. Not so fast though. The original intent WAS for Ravenwing Landspeeders to be able to score. Otherwise they wouldn't have allowed them to be taken in a troop unit. So since the Landspeeder is a part of a troop choice, and since GW has had the opportunity several times to FAQ the issue, I can only assume that yes Virginia, Landspeeders do count as scoring.

 

I think the original thought process was to prevent people from being able to take minimum sized troop choices, give them a transport then score with the transport in case the troops were destroyed. This leads to something that I don't think a lot of people don't think of when they try to deny the Landspeeder the ability to score...

 

It not only is RAW, its RAI... They wanted the Landspeeder from that squad to be scoring, they haven't taken that ability away despite multiple chances to do so. And to be perfectly blunt, it makes sense, as the landspeeder is used to not only scout ahead but to also take positions far from the fleet and "protect it at all costs" until the rest of the army can arrive.... and that sounds like they would be able to take an objective.

 

Having said all that, for someone to deny you the ability to claim an objective with your Landspeeders isn't "Legal". If I were in a tournament and they tried to say otherwise, the first thing I would do is pull out the FAQ's and ask the opponent to show me where I can't. Still won't allow it, call over the judge and ask him. If he rules against you, and this is very important, ask if it were house ruled. The reason for that is if it weren't house ruled before then show the judge the relevant FAQ's (both the rulebook and the codex), then ask him to show you were it says in the rulebook that the codex trumps the rulebook except for the Ravenwing. Also have the GW 800 number ready, most likely your going to have to call them to "over rule the judge". If they still persist then simply ask for either a forfeiture from your opponent or your money back from the tournament, as you have been cheated and proven it.

 

It sounds a little over the top, but it is a tournament setting. In a friendly setting be polite, but again let them know it is scoring.

 

Again unless its been House Ruled, which really needs to be agreed on by everyone, then they can't stop it from scoring.

[minionboy]

RAW states that speeders are scoring (granted only those from the attack squad). The FAQ has backed it up 3 times. So now we need to take a look at the possibilities of RAI.

 

Your argument that GW "backed it up" by not mentioning it is completely invalid. Using that same logic I can say that GW backs up arson and murder because they don't mention it in their FAQ. You cannot logically argue something and say that the lack of evidence is evidence, check out: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argument_from_ignorance

 

And again as I mentioned, it is impossible for anyone, even you and me, to say it was their intention to allow this odd quirk of how the rules interact with the new edition.

 

I have always said RAW says they score, but I do not think it was their intention.

 

EDIT: had to get one more post in ;)

[Interrogator Stobz]

HAHA, this old chestnut.

 

Never mind RAI, RAW says they ALWAYS score as a unit of one model, so clearly it's a non issue.

 

If your opponent is a nob, tell him if he doesn't want them to score at the end of the game, he can try to kill them first.

 

If he still doesnt want to play you remind him of his attitude regarding the First rule.

 

My thruppence

[Lord_Hail]

I used to play tourture, i mean tournaments for magic at a high level once. i quit because my opponents (most), would abuse any rule you didn't know and cheat when posable; not to say all but we as people in a competitve arena must expect this. it is in some peoples nature to do any measure to win; me i'm not like that and i didn't care to change to suit my enviorment. We as a fourm i belive we have ansered this question and should try to voice our opinions positively; we shouldn't get into knife fights over expenseve plasic. Best advice out of this is now you know and can use it to your advantge and know how to back it up in the rules. Apologys to all on off topic parts and spelling errors.