CheezeFezt Posted April 10, 2011 Share Posted April 10, 2011 What with all the RAW argument? There are no Rules As Written prohibitting a unit from being more than 2 types. All you have to do to prove me wrong is to quote the Rules As Written. What? No quotes?? That's the whole point of the RAW camp is you can actually quote the rules to argue the case. RAW is a DK is a MC. RAW is a DK with a PT is a JI. I can quote the rules if you like, but I believe everyone will accept these statements. But there are no RAW stating mutual exclusivity. If you says otherwise, quote the rules. You can not argue the absent of evidence is evidence of absence (logical fallacy "Ad Ignorantiam"). IOW, it's a logical fallacy to state because there are no rules written for mixed type, that the rules as written prohibit mixed type. If you try to argue that because the BRB provide a list of unit types, that the list is proof of mutual exclusivity, again, it's a logical fallacy. A list is not a statement of mutual exclusivity. For example, these are characteristic of a man: "short, tall, big, small, young, old". Just because I list some characteristics doesn't means they're exclusive (eg I can be tall and big). I know you know that because you try to re-write the rules for vehicle types into "sub-type", which are never defined anywhere. RAW, page 56 Vehicle: The different types of vehicle are: transport, tank, open-topped, fast, skimmer, and walker. Compare that to the RAW, page 51, Unit Types In this section, you will find the rules for each of these unit types, namely monstrous creatures, jump infantry, bikes & jetbikes, beasts & cavalry and artillery. There are no rules for combining the different infantry type nor are there any rules prohibiting the combination of the different infantry type. For vehicle, pg 56 These types can be combined to define, for example, a fast skimmer or an open-topped walker, in which case the vehicle has all of the rules for all of its types. Very specific RAW on how to deal with vehicle type combination. There are no vehicle "sub-type". Introducing that is just the logical fallacy of Red Herring. Bringing up how to deal with other crazy combination Infantry/Artillery, etc, is the logical fallacy of strawman. Strawman is arguing about something else, attacking that, then say the original must be false. The fact that crazy combo aren't playable doesn't means crazy combo is prohibited. You have to prove crazy combo is prohibited (eg the rules stated infantry types are mutually exclusive), not that they're not playable. RAW is DK with PT is both MC and JI. RAW is there are no rules written to deal with this. All that is left is 2 gentlemen trying to agree upon rules as intended. If you argue RAW, then quote the rules. That the whole point of Rules As Written, the rules are quoted. After saying all of that, I'm going to throw egg into my own face. Codex: Blood Angels allows IC to take either Jump Pack or Bike. jump pack Models equipped with jump packs are jump infantry Space Marine Bike Models equipped with Space Marine Bikes follow all of the rules for bikes RAW still doesn't prevent mixed type, but everybody had always played IC with Jump Pack as only Jump Infantry;with Bike as only Biker. Never picked and choose which is better. So DK with PT is only a JI??? Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/225836-dreadknight-teleporter/page/8/#findComment-2718922 Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grey Mage Posted April 10, 2011 Share Posted April 10, 2011 Its irrelevant- the Dreadknight cant use a personal teleporter RAW. Why? Because the Personal Teleporter says it can only be used by interceptor squads. Since the one chosen by the Dreadknight is 'just like' we have to use all the rules for it, not just the ones that suit us.... and it becomes an unusable option. /done. No need to come up with a bunch of rules for hybrid unit types that dont exist. Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/225836-dreadknight-teleporter/page/8/#findComment-2718967 Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aidoneus Posted April 10, 2011 Share Posted April 10, 2011 Its irrelevant- the Dreadknight cant use a personal teleporter RAW. Why? Because the Personal Teleporter says it can only be used by interceptor squads. Since the one chosen by the Dreadknight is 'just like' we have to use all the rules for it, not just the ones that suit us.... and it becomes an unusable option. /done. No need to come up with a bunch of rules for hybrid unit types that dont exist. -_- You, sir, have made me very happy! Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/225836-dreadknight-teleporter/page/8/#findComment-2718988 Share on other sites More sharing options...
gil galed Posted April 10, 2011 Share Posted April 10, 2011 What with all the RAW argument? There are no Rules As Written prohibitting a unit from being more than 2 types. I'd point out that actually the way the rule book works is actions are allowed by the book, not disallowed. Otherwise I could do a multitude of things which aren't in the book and by your definition of RAW it would be fine because "theres no rule against it" Its irrelevant- the Dreadknight cant use a personal teleporter RAW. Why? Because the Personal Teleporter says it can only be used by interceptor squads. Since the one chosen by the Dreadknight is 'just like' we have to use all the rules for it, not just the ones that suit us.... and it becomes an unusable option. /done. No need to come up with a bunch of rules for hybrid unit types that dont exist. -_- You, sir, have made me very happy! Actually it doesn't say it's a interceptor personal teleporter, I think the fact that it works "Just like" a IS PT but can be taken by the NDK means it still works by RAW. Sorry. ~Gil :P Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/225836-dreadknight-teleporter/page/8/#findComment-2718992 Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brother Valerius Posted April 10, 2011 Share Posted April 10, 2011 No, Grey Mage is right. If it is "just like" the interceptor squad one, that means in all respects. RAW, no personal teleporter for the NDK. Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/225836-dreadknight-teleporter/page/8/#findComment-2719223 Share on other sites More sharing options...
gil galed Posted April 10, 2011 Share Posted April 10, 2011 No, Grey Mage is right. If it is "just like" the interceptor squad one, that means in all respects. RAW, no personal teleporter for the NDK. I fail to see how the NDK having a wargear option: Personal teleporter Which is described as "this works just like the Interceptor Squad Personal Teleporter (page 28)" means it can't take it. Clearly it has a wargear option it can take, "Personal teleporter", whose functions are exactly the same as those described on page 28. Specifically a NDK personal teleporter is distinguished from the Interceptor Squad Personal Teleporter. Either it overides the "IS only" bit, or more to the point the exclusion is redundant as isn't described as being the same, it's described as working in the same way which to my mind means jump infantry etc. Either way it's redundant as well all know it can use it in the same way we all know it will be changed to moving as jump infantry. ~Gil ^_^ does this also mean that, by RAW, the summoning can't effect vehicles with WSF? While WSF makes them valid targets summoning specifically says no vehicles. hmmm. Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/225836-dreadknight-teleporter/page/8/#findComment-2719286 Share on other sites More sharing options...
DinoDoc Posted April 10, 2011 Share Posted April 10, 2011 If you're going to have a raw argument, Dreadknights technically aren't allowed to have Personal Teleporters anyway as the rules for them say Interceptor Squad only. Problem solved. Apparently this is what I get for skipping the last 2 pages of a thread. Egg on my face. Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/225836-dreadknight-teleporter/page/8/#findComment-2719296 Share on other sites More sharing options...
ntgcleaner Posted October 21, 2011 Share Posted October 21, 2011 This has been FAQ'ed, Page 2, Bottom of the left hand column: A: It is a monstrous creature that moves like jump infantry. If this was said already, I'm sorry, but after page four, I skimmed everything and saw that people were still arguing... Anyways, topic closed, FAQ'ed Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/225836-dreadknight-teleporter/page/8/#findComment-2906044 Share on other sites More sharing options...
RebG Posted October 21, 2011 Share Posted October 21, 2011 FAQ'd indeed, I'm pretty sure that's why no one has commented on this thread since April dude! Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/225836-dreadknight-teleporter/page/8/#findComment-2906080 Share on other sites More sharing options...
ntgcleaner Posted October 24, 2011 Share Posted October 24, 2011 Yes, but it was never confirmed and if people were like me - getting back into the game, they may have the same question and instead of heading to GW to look for the FAQ (because it's not obvious), they see this post and then are reminded (by viewing the last page) that it has been FAQ'd. I haven't played since before the GK codex came out. That's how I got here. Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/225836-dreadknight-teleporter/page/8/#findComment-2908060 Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.