'Slingshotting'

[Something Wycked]

There's a hole in that "vice versa," thade. That Pinning section indicates what would happen to a unit if it were to join an IC. Defining what would happen and if it is actually possible or allowed are completely different things. :)

 

That line does not give the unit the ability to join an IC; it also does not contradict the IC rules that Ramses quoted.

 

The RAI is obviously that a unit should be able to move into coherency and join an IC. The RAI is also obvious that detaching and then reattaching to circumvent "moves at the slowest" is an illegal move. Since we're sticking just to the RAW to justify the maneuver, we'll stick to just the RAW in this case as well.

[Grimtooth]

Ramses, check that page again; I did say to "read it carefully". <3

 

Specifically, one of the last bullet points discusses what happens when an IC moves into coherency with a unit that is Pinned that the IC is Pinned as well, "or vice versa" . Vice versa means that if a unit moves into coherency with an IC that is Pinned, the unit becomes Pinned.

 

This would only be possible if it was legal to have a unit move into coherency with an IC and attach to him.

 

You can imply that vice versa means that you can join a unit to an IC, yet you have no permission or direction to do so throughout the entire BRB.

 

Which then leads you to choice,

 

Prove the legality of a tactic on implied rules.

 

or

 

Prove the legality of a tactic on the rules as written.

[thade]

There's a hole in that "vice versa," thade. That Pinning section indicates what would happen to a unit if it were to join an IC. Defining what would happen and if it is actually possible or allowed are completely different things. ;)

What on earth?! o_O

 

I refuse to believe that you can possibly buy that stance as sane, man. If they talk about it happening, it's as legal as anything else in the game. They don't include examples that fall outside of their rule set; they can't, because any example in the book is part of their rule set. >_<

 

Dan, I see you reading this thread. SAVE. ME.

[Grimtooth]

There's a hole in that "vice versa," thade. That Pinning section indicates what would happen to a unit if it were to join an IC. Defining what would happen and if it is actually possible or allowed are completely different things. :D

 

Which still then asks the question to make slingshotting legal,

 

Where in the BRB are the rules for units joining an IC?

[dswanick]

I refuse to believe that you can possibly buy that stance as sane, man.

But, thade - is it any less sane than claiming that a simply written rule in the rule book has no meaning, because you can simply use a loophole to circumvent it? :)

If they talk about it happening, it's as legal as anything else in the game. They don't include examples that fall outside of their rule set; they can't, because any example in the book is part of their rule set. >_<

Let's see how this sits with you :

If they talk about it not happening being allowed, it's as illegal as anything else in the game. They don't include examples rules that fall outside of their rule set; they can't, because any example rule in the book is part of their rule set. :D

This is exactly the argument that some have been trying to make in various ways throughout this thread about the "moves at the speed of the slowest model" rule. That it is written in the rules so simply negates the legality of a "loophole" which could be used to avoid it. (See your earlier comments about this being a "Gentleman's Ruleset") ;)

[Something Wycked]

I have a whole new level of respect for you, dswanick :)

 

thade: Its absolutely sane. See dswanick's post :D He said it much better than I could.

[thade]

The only thing that really negates a loophole of this magnitude is a friendly demeanor on both sides. :D

 

My entire purpose here is to try and demonstrate that both sides have foundation in RAW, which is inconceivably frustrating. The only thing worse is that people are trying to take advantage of it and since it's "half-legal" it looks like they can. That's RAW, and that's horrible. Here is a clear and necessary place for RAI. RAW we're grey, as when you consider both sides of the argument you see they rightfully bash well-founded noggins together.

 

For the purposes of this elucidation, I'd like to lay down a definition.

 

Remain attached: If an IC and unit that are attached before a Movement Phase are attached at the end of the Movement Phase, regardless of the order in which they move, they remain attached; this is in contract to newly attached.

 

I'm of the firm mind set that the RAI is very clear: if the IC is going to end up still attached to the unit he was attached to before the Movement Phase started, then he's restricted by their movement (and vice versa). It seems to be almost rooted in intention. If you intend for the unit and IC to remain attached, then the IC and the unit are each restricted by the other's slowest model.

 

However, the issue is that the RAW is not very clear...and because somebody might do something mega-dumb (a la Stelek) the entire scenario is circumvented with this house rule that I've seen locally:

 

At the end of the Movement phase, if an IC is within 2" of a unit, they're attached.

 

I'd be curious at this point to hear how you all have been playing insofar as the IC attachment rules. We've analyzed this to it's character-for-character level and I think we all agree it's mega dumb? Yet we only just noticed it? How have you handled it when it came up before and didn't result in a lengthy OR post? :)

 

EDIT: clarifications

[Something Wycked]

Honestly thade, I believe the RAW case is dead for the slingshotting side. Ramses has put forth the fact that there is no RAW that permits a unit to move into coherency with an IC to join the two together. By RAW, an IC must do the moving into or out of coherency, ergo there is no slingshot.

 

For me, the IC attachment rules have never come into play. My IC's are joined to a squad at the beginning of the game and there they stay unless their unit dies, and my friends play the same way. There's two reasons for this: the first time I played against Tau, I vaporised their battlesuit IC with a stray lascannon shot. The second is that my HQ is never the focal point of my force- he's always a support role and stays with his unit for protection, whereas my friends typically use ICs that are assault beasts and are joined by a squad of the same, and they never separate.

[thade]

There is a lot of "RAW" that doesn't directly say you can do a thing but directly implies you can do a thing. The example I cited (where a unit moving within range of an IC that is Pinned joins him/her and becomes Pinned) is something you all elect to ignore (which is a bit weird, honestly) is only one of these kinds of things in the rule set.

 

If you guys are honestly "Slingshotting", you honestly disappoint me. Creatively exploiting oversights in the rules is neither creative nor tactical; it is crude and dishonest. :\

 

It begets very little merit even in theory. If it feels cheeky, it is; this game is a gentlemen's agreement...and not only by my say-so, given what a few others in this thread have said. <3

 

EDIT: clarification

[Something Wycked]

The only thing I'm ignoring, by RAW, is that if a unit can join an IC who is pinned, that unit will become pinned also :D That rule in and of itself does not grant them permission to move into coherency with an IC to join him. By RAW.

[thade]

The only thing I'm ignoring, by RAW, is that if a unit can join an IC who is pinned, that unit will become pinned also :D That rule in and of itself does not grant them permission to move into coherency with an IC to join him. By RAW.

Okay. You asked for it. Here you go.

 

Show me where in the book, by RAW, when you roll a die you must read the Top Facing when determining what the result of the die roll was.

 

No, really.

 

It's no where. No where in the book does it say this; it doesn't even say you need to be consistent about which facing you use to determine your die roll result. So, per RAW as you seem to read it, everything you roll is a six.

 

Now...I bet you think that's cheeky. ;) If you do, refer to my previous post.

[Grimtooth]

Honestly thade, I believe the RAW case is dead for the slingshotting side. Ramses has put forth the fact that there is no RAW that permits a unit to move into coherency with an IC to join the two together. By RAW, an IC must do the moving into or out of coherency, ergo there is no slingshot.

 

For me, the IC attachment rules have never come into play. My IC's are joined to a squad at the beginning of the game and there they stay unless their unit dies, and my friends play the same way. There's two reasons for this: the first time I played against Tau, I vaporised their battlesuit IC with a stray lascannon shot. The second is that my HQ is never the focal point of my force- he's always a support role and stays with his unit for protection, whereas my friends typically use ICs that are assault beasts and are joined by a squad of the same, and they never separate.

 

I am not choosing to ignore it at all Thade. My point is that you have an instance that implies an action can occur, but no page number or rules source to cite how said action does occur. The BRB gives you specific guidelines on how an IC joins or leaves a unit, but does not give you specific guidelines on how a unit can join or leave an IC.

 

So as I said, you have one very miniscule instance that implies an action can be done but that then has no other rules support as to how you are supposed to conduct said action.

[Something Wycked]

It's no where. No where in the book does it say this; it doesn't even say you need to be consistent about which facing you use to determine your die roll result. So, per RAW as you seem to read it, everything you roll is a six.

Its nowhere in the 40k rulebook because how to read dice is not a 40k rule- the top face of dice have been read since their inception ;) ICs joining to units, however, is a 40k rule- while units joining to ICs is not. :D

[thade]

Brother Ramses missed or chose to ignore my recent post. I'm over it.

 

You all seem to be saying that there is an example in the BRB where something occurs that is outside of the rules and it is not stated to be outside of the rules; yet you seem to be okay with this.

 

So..every time you throw a die...it's a six? That way leads to madness. <3

 

I ask again: how have each of you been handling this at your own gaming groups up until now? Have ICs been "leaving and rejoining" in the same Movement Phase? Or, put another way, have ICs been moving their full allowed distance, unrestricted by the unit they're with? Or have you honestly never seen anything like this come up? IE, every time an IC has left a unit, he's done so at full speed and detached from the squad?

[Something Wycked]

You all seem to be saying that there is an example in the BRB where something occurs that is outside of the rules and it is not stated to be outside of the rules; yet you seem to be okay with this.

Absolutely. Its a clue to RAI, but it is not RAW.

 

So..every time you throw a die...it's a six? That way leads to madness. <3

Missed my last post did you? ;)

 

I ask again: how have each of you been handling this at your own gaming groups up until now? Have ICs been "leaving and rejoining" in the same Movement Phase? Or, put another way, have ICs been moving their full allowed distance, unrestricted by the unit they're with? Or have you honestly never seen anything like this come up? IE, every time an IC has left a unit, he's done so at full speed and detached from the squad?

It has quite literally never come up. I am very fortunate that there are no Steleks in my neck of the woods. ICs move at the same speed as the squad they're attached to, unless they're speeding away, having been declared to be detached from the unit and remaining so like gentlemen. :D

[thade]

It's no where. No where in the book does it say this; it doesn't even say you need to be consistent about which facing you use to determine your die roll result. So, per RAW as you seem to read it, everything you roll is a six.

Its nowhere in the 40k rulebook because how to read dice is not a 40k rule- the top face of dice have been read since their inception ;) ICs joining to units, however, is a 40k rule- while units joining to ICs is not. :D

I am at an utter loss here as to how you aren't seeing this. So, I will ride out RAW to its bitter, gruesome end.

 

Previous editions of the BRB have zero bearing on the current BRB. If you are comfortable applying the nighthawks quote in my signature to reading the top face on a die to determine its result, then you must be comfortable applying RAI other places as well. In which case, you're already out of the scope of RAW.

 

If you are not, then RAW is RAW. Current edition RAW say nothing about the die's facing, except for The Most Important Rule. Ironically, The Most Important Rule is about as RAI as you can get.

 

At the end of the day, what are you arguing for? Do you honestly believe Sling-shotting is legal? Or illegal?

 

ADDENDUM:

 

I think we're all actually in agreement? In which case...is this a grey area candidate? As only RAI solves the day?

[dswanick]

I ask again: how have each of you been handling this at your own gaming groups up until now? Have ICs been "leaving and rejoining" in the same Movement Phase? Or, put another way, have ICs been moving their full allowed distance, unrestricted by the unit they're with? Or have you honestly never seen anything like this come up? IE, every time an IC has left a unit, he's done so at full speed and detached from the squad?

It has quite literally never come up. I am very fortunate that there are no Steleks in my neck of the woods.

^This

ICs move at the same speed as the squad they're attached to, unless they're speeding away, having been declared to be detached from the unit and remaining so like gentlemen. :D

^ And, this.

[thade]

Right...so, we do agree. Sling-shotting = not okay.

 

(If you don't agree, speak now. <3)

 

Thanks for the work out, gentlemen. I'm gonna take a break.

[Grimtooth]

Yea, from my first post in this thread you could pretty much see my opinion on sling shotting.

 

Where you are going with this dice roll nonsense I have no idea. You are trying to equate not given specific direction on how to read the dice roll with specific direction for IC joining and leaving units and lack of specific direction for units joining and leaving IC.

 

I don't have a reference, but I am pretty sure the BRB tells me to reference my codex but doesn't specifically tell me to pick up my codex, open it, and turn the pages. See? I can be just as silly about it as you Thade when it comes to pinpointing an issue and then trying to inflate it to make a comparison.

 

If you really boil what Stelek is trying to do at the most basic level you get,

 

"Well the rules don't say I can't, so I can."

 

That has been his repertoire since his banning and arguments on several popular forums which led to his joke of a blog and cult following. Simple as that.

[thade]

I was actually trying to show how pure RAW can be (to quote myself) "mega-dumb" when you follow it and only it, as Stelek was doing there. I did so by example, you did so directly. While you and I took different avenues, it seems we came to the same place.

 

So, I think we do see eye-to-eye here, despite the defacto language barrier the Internet imposes, even on two speakers of the same language. :D

 

ADDENDUM: I agree with you.

[Grimtooth]

Well the problem I have is that Stelek is not following RAW. He never once has permission to join a unit to an IC. He cannot quote a page reference for those rules and cannot use the implication that it can be done as RAW. He could try to stretch that implication into RAI, but it has zero basis for RAW. By that same implication I could RAI that the ONLY time a unit can join an IC is when the IC is pinned.

 

His argument was based on implied RAI, not RAW in the slightest. When challenged on it, he instead just misdirected the argument with personal attacks.

[Something Wycked]

By that same implication I could RAI that the ONLY time...

Ramses, did you just turn RAI into a verb? :D

 

I will RAW you into submission! :lol:

[Dan VK]

By that same implication I could RAI that the ONLY time...

Ramses, did you just turn RAI into a verb? B)

 

I will RAW you into submission! :lol:

I... Whoah. :D

[nurglez]

The only thing that says to me that IC's can be joined by squads. is the part that says if an IC wants to not join a squad, he/she/it has to remain more then 2 inches away, which would imply that as soon as an IC ends up within 2 inches from a squad it shall auto join... (page 48).

 

However, I still feel that "stelek style slingshot" is illegal, normal sling shots are, and are fine :lol:

[Gentlemanloser]

I see this as very simple.

 

Regardless of who moved (unit or IC), if at the end of the Phase, if the IC is within 2" of one or more units, they join one (of your choice).

 

As you can move your own units in any order, it matters not if you move the IC first into open space, then a unit to him. Or move the unit first into open space, then the IC to them.

 

The process is the same, as is the result.

 

The only thing I can possibly think would make any difference is if the IC was in dangerous Terrain and you didn't want to move it for fear of the DT test.

 

Now, if movement order actually mattered (in your own turn, it really doesn't. With regards to ICs), then this might be an issue. But it doesn't. Regardless of who moves when, either the IC is able to get within 2", or they aren't.

 

It's not the Unit joining the IC by moving next to the IC. It's still the IC joining the Unit at the end of the Phase...