FAQ list to send to GW...Thoughts anyone??

[coredump]

Jul 25, 2012 7:38:55 GMT amareis said:

So you're wondering if a psychic power that targets friendly units can shoot down your own FMC?
*cough*Not!*cough*

Check the rules. It says any hit from a shooting attack. Catalyst is a shooting attack.
As of now, casting FnP has a 33% chance of wounding your flyrant.

P. 2 of BRB.
"Attacks and Wounds are the only characteristics that can
be raised above 10. No characteristic can be modified below 0."

So for ID purposes, S10. The power only has special rules for rolls of 11 and 12. Nothing more.

Few problems with that.
1) p. 2 is specifically dealing with characteristics of models and units. Even the paragraph that states it mentions that specifically. (though I have no doubts that is how GW will rule it.)
2) It is not clear in the spell rules that rolling an 11 gives anything but an automatic wound; it may not be S10. That is the question.

I did read the entire paragraph. But it is irrelevant if you are not in base contact. The rules states that it works when you are in base contact.
It does not state that it works even if you are not in base contact.
It does not state that it works if you were in base contact only that it works until the end of the assault phase.

The Lash Whip has no requirement that the target model must stay in base contact.
It is a simple if/then trigger. If you get in base contact, then you are I1 until the end of the phase. Getting out of base contact does not change the result.
If they meant it otherwise, there would have been zero need to the second part of the sentence.
"Units in base contact are at I1" would have done everything you are asserting they do. They only way the following phrase makes sense, or even matters, is if it is independent of *still* being in base contact.

[kurbutti]

So you're wondering if a psychic power that targets friendly units can shoot down your own FMC?
*cough*Not!*cough*

For one so strict about RAW should be able to see the issue.

P. 2 of BRB.
"Attacks and Wounds are the only characteristics that can
be raised above 10. No characteristic can be modified below 0."

So for ID purposes, S10. The power only has special rules for rolls of 11 and 12. Nothing more.

Still you fail to provide any substance for your deduction that rolls of 11-12 = S10.

Jul 24, 2012 20:24:36 GMT kurbutti said:

You on the other hand didn't read the sentence to the end.

The chronological order in which the events take place is the material point. Hypotehtical situation:

A Tyrant armed with Lash Whip & Boneswords assaults a nearby enemy unit. Overwatch fails to do any damage, and the Tyrant successfully charges the unit, reaching contact with a Space Marine Sergeant armed with a Power Weapon. Now this is the point where you concretically reach base contact. So therefore the Sarge is now I1 due to Lash Whip. [End of charge-Sub-Phase]

At the start of the Fight Sub-Phase, the Tyrant issues a challenge to the unit. However, the unit contais a Space Marine captain that chooses to accept the Challenge. Both move into base-to-base contact as per the Challenge rules. Captain is therefore reduced to I1 as well. Is the Space Marine Sergeant still at Initiative 1? Yes, because:

Codex: Tyranids states, as agreed, that any model in base contact counts its Initiative as 1 until the end of the Assault phase. It is undisputed that the Sergeant *is* in Base Contact with the Tyrant, albeit in the charge Sub-Phase. Still, the Lash Whip applies its effects and the Sergeant counts his Initiative as 1 until the end of the Assault Phase. Like I said, it does *not* say you have to *maintain* base-to-base contact for the Lash Whip to work. It only requires you to be in base contact at one point

I did read the entire paragraph. But it is irrelevant if you are not in base contact. The rules states that it works when you are in base contact.
It does not state that it works even if you are not in base contact.
It does not state that it works if you were in base contact only that it works until the end of the assault phase.

In your example it really is irrelevant since the seargent wont be fighting until the next assault phase unless the captain survives.[/]
So who cares

But really, let's cut away the (please do not swear). The rule is there to make sure that the I1 stays on the models in contact with the Lash whip wielding creature, not to give you an assault phase lasting modifier that you can cling to to because the rules says you can.
If a lash whip wielding creature attacks you and you move out of reach of the lash whips, you're no longer affected. No need to cling to the words.
But, if you play them like this, then all good fortune to you I don't because I don't think it was meant to work like this and I don't want to seem unfair to my opposing player.

This wasn't a problem in 5th edition because combats alwyas took place in a single instance. There was no need to apply any timing constraints. Now that there are challenges paraellel to the combat, it becomes an issue.

In your example it really is irrelevant since the seargent wont be fighting until the next assault phase unless the captain survives.[/]
So who cares

Oh, how foolish of me.

Anyway, I'm done repeating myself. I've provided most of the relevant links to the topics that concern these matters. If you still think my question proposals are unfounded, then please give your input into them.

[amareis]

Most of what is being discussed here is being discussed/mentioned for the purpose of bending/twisting/discussing the rules.

If you apply just a tiny amount of logic/common sense/RAI then you can read and understand the point of the rules.

The thing about the FMC being shot down by your own psychic buff is just pointless. If you want to exploit the rules about downing your own FMC, then go ahead, but it really doesn't make any sense to discuss it.
I'll even go as far as to say that you will never meet an opposing player that will deny you the option of casting Catalyst on your FMC without the 33% chance of downing it. Be sensible about this.

The thing about Lash whips will most likely never be a problem since the previously "lashed" model wont be able to fight anyway. So this is pretty much pointless as well.

The S11-12 would allow you to ID a T6 model if you use S12, but come on, would you really press the point if the situation arose? I wouldn't. I'm nice that way.
I don't think any S of any weapon is supposed to ID a T6 model.

My main point being that you shouldn't e-mail questions to GW if you already know the answer, but just refuse to acknowledge because of "but it doesn't say that I can't do it".

[Jabberwocky]

This FMC thing is really annoying me now.

Catalyst is not a psychic shooting attack! You are all thinking of onslaught, the lesser used power.

There is no risk in giving him FnP, only in making him run another 2d6, which probably should be dangerous for him!

[Lanesend]

Seeing the numerous threads here on TTH about these subjects and the differences of opinions voiced there, I dare to say it is not 'pointless' to get some clarification on the rules.

RAI is kind of pointless as long as we cannot discuss it with the rules writers themselves (I know, I also use that argument sometimes, and it works fine for the kitchen table, but on tournaments it's always better to be sure how a rule works, then hoping that you and your opponent interpret RAI the same way)

Also I see that no-one (including you) voted "bad idea" or "don't care".

As for downing a FMC by casting catalyst on it. We will be sensible about it, but an opponent bringing it up could use the RAW argument and we WOULD be rolling grounded tests. (-edit- OK just read Jabbers post, I guess I was wrong about catalyst. Just replace the word with onslought and the question is still good)

If you don't like these requests being forwarded to GW, feel free to send in a different list yourself.

[coredump]

Jabberwocky is correct, it was Onlsaught I was thinking of.

Amereis: The problem is, what is one persons "obviously yes" is another person's "of course no" And even if I am willing to agree with my opponent on how to change the rules, it is good to realize that it *is* a change. And it is worthwhile for GW to write a tighter set of rules.

But the Lash Whip issue is not a rare occurence, it can very easily happen, and it would be good to have clarification how to handle it. (more for Necrons than us, but still)

[The Hive Mind]

A note on that [e-mail] it dose work, it takes awhile to get one, but it seems the replies come from the Studio itself. There again imagine how MANY emails they must be shifting through with 6th Edition release, so waiting a week or so isn't that bad.

But good idea to compile a FAQ for them, suppose the easier and clearer you can make it the easier it'll be for them to answer.

[jifel]

Is Smash able to applied to "Vector Strike" attacks? RAW its a no Id think, but I could very much see them FAQing it to a yes.