does the new gk faq make the ravenwing landspeeder scoring

[hummus]

from the gk FAQ

 

Q:If a walker is the target of Unyielding Anvil, from

the Grand Strategy special rule, can it claim objectives

even though it is a vehicle? (p22)

A: Yes.

[EPK]

from the gk FAQ

 

Q:If a walker is the target of Unyielding Anvil, from

the Grand Strategy special rule, can it claim objectives

even though it is a vehicle? (p22)

A: Yes.

 

I'm confused by this question... First off, RAW, it is already scoring (though not everyone plays it that way). Second, why would another codex have any bearing on the Dark Angels?

[breng77]

While it has no direct effect it does lend creedence to the argument that if a codex says that a vehicle is a scoring unit that it is in fact scoring.

[EPK]

While it has no direct effect it does lend creedence to the argument that if a codex says that a vehicle is a scoring unit that it is in fact scoring.

 

Ah ha. Perhaps that is what Hummus was eluding to.

[hummus]

oops yes thats what i was eluding to

[EPK]

And on a side note, it is ONLY the LS that is bought along with the Attack Squadron of bikes.

[Tanhausen]

I though exactly the same and brought it up to the tournaments I regularly go to...which have consistently been very vocal about "5th edition doesn't allow scoring vehicles... you cheapskate"... to which I simply stated "p.27" and shut it up myself...

 

I can't wait to see some people on saturday and give them a biiiiiiiiiiiiiiig smile :)

 

Who cares if our LS is overpriced and will fall to a stiff breeze?

[Isiah]

Well our RW RAS speeders are indeed always scoring as that is RAW in our Codex and don't let anyone tell you otherwise until a revised DA faq tells us differently. Of course clubs and tourneys may houserule against this, but that's all it is a houserule and not in any way official.

 

Generally though the problem is you can't use another unit/codex's rule as a basis of an argument for a different unit/codex as each faq answer is tailored to a particular question in a way that or might not be purposely independent of any wider rule implications for fluff or balance reasons, or by just being badly thought through at the time of writing :ermm:.

 

I don't see the Unyielding Anvil / vehicle issue as being a precedent for anything, until GW choose to make it so themselves -_-

 

Cheers

I

[breng77]

I don't see the Unyielding Anvil / vehicle issue as being a precedent for anything, until GW choose to make it so themselves rolleyes.gif

 

Well it is at least a precedent for the argument against the people who argue the vehicles can never be scoring, as is shows at least one case where gw made an exception to this rule, which means that the vehicles scoring rule is (as is really every GW rule) vehicles don't count as scoring unless otherwise specified.

[krewl]

I'd say it does not make it adamant that GW wanted to keep the speeders scoring but it is at the every least supporting evidence.

 

We now have; Codex > Main rulesbook where our codex says that the speeders score.

Untill now the argument was always (Over here in NL at least) that vehicles can never score period so DA should not be cheap scate about it and just accept then don't score.

 

Now we have a FAQ entry clearly stating that yes a vehicle CAN score. So that throws out this type of argument against it.

 

So we now have;

1: RAW on our side

2. No FAQ that removed the scoring (So even though other units like devastators had their scoring status removed, GW did not change it for our speeders.)

3. Clear as can be precedent that yes within THIS rulesset vehicles CAN score.

 

It would seem like an open and shut case now.

[ShinyRhino]

To play Devil's Advocate here...

 

If you tried to tell me that your Codex Whatchamacallit vehicles are scoring units because of something put forth in the Grey Knights FAQ, I'd politely point out that every single Marine FAQ contains the exact same rulings for Techmarines/Iron Priests in each version (DA/BT/Nilla/BA/Wolves). This is proof that FAQs are not applicable to anything outside of their assigned Codecii (Codexes?). Otherwise, they wouldn't have needed to duplicate thaose rulings across every FAQ after the Wolf FAQ was created, as it was the first one to have that ruling.

 

DA speeders are scoring because the DA Codex explicitly says they are.

Ork Deff Dreds are NOT scoring, because while the Codex says they can be taken as Troops, it does NOT say they're scoring units. That causes them to fall under the BRB rule regarding non-scoring units.

 

It was an open and shut case BEFORE the GK FAQ.

[breng77]

Which is how many people feel, but many places still argued that Vehicles could never be scoring, now we have another instance in which a vehicle can score.

[thade]

ShinyRhino wrapped this up, guys. Hook. Line. And sinker.

[Brother Landrain]

I don't see the Unyielding Anvil / vehicle issue as being a precedent for anything, until GW choose to make it so themselves rolleyes.gif

 

Well it is at least a precedent for the argument against the people who argue the vehicles can never be scoring, as is shows at least one case where gw made an exception to this rule, which means that the vehicles scoring rule is (as is really every GW rule) vehicles don't count as scoring unless otherwise specified.

 

Unfortunately, nothing GW says can be taken as precedent, as they are consistently Inconsistent across the board.

 

For example the they allow Turbo-boost on a scout move, for everyone except the DA, but they do not allow teleport Shunt moves, which are virtually identical to a turboboost for all practical purposes.

[Something Wycked]

Unfortunately, nothing GW says can be taken as precedent, as they are consistently Inconsistent across the board.

 

For example the they allow Turbo-boost on a scout move, for everyone except the DA, but they do not allow teleport Shunt moves, which are virtually identical to a turboboost for all practical purposes.

"Virtually identical for all practical purposes" in this case is wrong.

 

Turbo boosting grants a cover save; Shunting does not.

Turbo boosting must take into account terrain and models; Shunting does not.

Turbo boosting can be used every game turn; Shunting has a once-only limit per unit.

 

I suspect if only Interceptors could Shunt, they would have allowed it in the Scout move phase, but since a Monstrous Creature can also Shunt, they thought that would be overpowered. Bikers and Interceptors assaulting in turn 1 is not overpowered; a Monstrous Creature assaulting in turn 1 very well could be.

[Isiah]

I don't think there's actually a rules question per se at the centre of this topic – it's more an opinion-seeking topic. And that has already been dealt with from within the DA forum, and by others here in the OR.

 

So... before it strays off into other areas...

 

 

Cheers

I