CDR_Farsight wrote: Nymphomanius wrote:
Precedence for ignoring benefits for cover for only the weapons or shots from a single unit almost always state..."this unit/weapon" or "hits from this unit/weapon" or "wounds from this unit/weapon"
The rule for devilfish specifically states that units ATTACKED don't get ANY benefits from cover. Why would the rule say "attacked" when there are 2 more steps in the shooting phase (resolving hits and resolving wounds) before you even get to take an armor save? Now...did GW intend for it to only apply to pathfinders or the Devilfish...possibly, but the legal and intelligence communities will tell you intent is nearly impossible to prove with certainty. Did GW write the rule in such a way to only apply to Pathfinders or the Devilfish....definitively NO!
Ok so by your reasoning gun drones can't shoot if there's a friendly unit closer to them than the enemy because their rules state can only target closest unit in shooting phase misses out the word enemy?
You know RAI is meant to be the devilfish attacks ignore cover whilst the recon drone is embarked, I would let you argue that if a unit has a negative to hit modifier due to being in cover via a special rule that would also be ignored but anything else no.
Like I said come back to me when you find someone who'll let you do that, if you tried that in my gaming circle and we're overbearing and tried to insist on shenanigans like that you wouldn't be invited to game with us again...
Why would it stop applying to the pathfinder squad then? They used "attack" instead of hits or wounds for a reason. It makes no sense to use "attack" for just a single model/unit. Embarked drones are already counted as part of the Devilfish via the rules, so they would have said "this unit" if it was truly only for the devilfish. It would be a huge nerf if they only applied the benefits to a couple gun drones/SMS and a burst cannon. I don't think ignoring a +1 to save is shenanigans and thus far, I haven't seen any argument with rules precedent that negates the RAW.
Let's try not to get personal here. This is a rules discussion...I'd appreciate a bit more civility in your future posts.
Also, the entry I'm looking at for Threat Identification Protocols clearly states "nearest visible enemy unit" so I'm not sure where you're getting that example from...
Ok so let's start from the top the rules I have state.
A unit attacked by a devilfish with a MB3 recon drone embarked gain no benefit to their saving throws from being in cover.
You're saying that RAW if I shoot at a unit with 1 gun of said devilfish at a unit they can no longer claim any cover save what so ever?
Is that til the end of the phase? Battle round? The game? If I shoot at a unit this week when I play someone next year can I still claim the effects of that shot against the same unit? Because there's no timescales on that rule and you can't argue common sense because your argument is based on RAW not RAI why can 1 devilfish do the same as the 4th effect of our markerlight table?
GW are terrible at writing rules they put points into the dark angel codex for a model without rules!
To me this is clearly an oversight from GW and if there's a recon drone embarked on a devilfish the devilfish attacks ignore cover saves.
Also you mentioned nerf I am genuinely confused how ignoring cover even from just 12 str5 shots is a nerf?