Dangerous Terrain Rules Question (Necrons)

[The Twilight Fade]

Just a thought on a rule combination that I noticed last night and just wanted to hear your guys thoughts on it.

Orikan the Diviner makes open ground difficult terrain for the purposes of the moving (temporal snares) and the C'tan shard (Writhing Worldscape) makes everything moving through difficult terrain take dangerous terrain tests.

My main question is would models moving out in the open have to take dangerous terrain tests since it "counts as" difficult terrain. Now my friend ruled against this last night because they aren't actually in terrain.

Thoughts?

[Bean]

Just a thought on a rule combination that I noticed last night and just wanted to hear your guys thoughts on it.

Orikan the Diviner makes open ground difficult terrain for the purposes of the moving (temporal snares) and the C'tan shard (Writhing Worldscape) makes everything moving through difficult terrain take dangerous terrain tests.

My main question is would models moving out in the open have to take dangerous terrain tests since it "counts as" difficult terrain. Now my friend ruled against this last night because they aren't actually in terrain.

Thoughts?

From what I recall of the two rules, I think your friend is correct, but I don't have the codex in front of me, and I'd need to see the actual text to say for certain.

[DrWobbles]

If they're making a difficult terrain test they must also test for dangerous terrain.

This would work with Cryptek's tremor stave as well. These abilities wouldn't be put in the book if you couldn't use them together.

TEAMWORK!

[DrWobbles]

From what I recall of the two rules, I think your friend is correct, but I don't have the codex in front of me, and I'd need to see the actual text to say for certain.

Why would you even bother posting?

Tremorrstave Quake rule: ...all enemy units hit by a weapon with the Quake type treat open ground as difficult ground...

Temporal Snares: ...all enemy units that move count as moving through difficult terrain.

Writhing Worldsccape: ...all difficult terrain is also dangerous for the enemy.

If a certain piece of terrain is treated as difficult terrain and these special abilities treat open ground as difficult terrain then the C'Tan ability would also make it dangerous.

[Bean]

Why would you even bother posting?

Tremorrstave Quake rule: ...all enemy units hit by a weapon with the Quake type treat open ground as difficult ground...

Temporal Snares: ...all enemy units that move count as moving through difficult terrain.

Writhing Worldsccape: ...all difficult terrain is also dangerous for the enemy.

If a certain piece of terrain is treated as difficult terrain and these special abilities treat open ground as difficult terrain then the C'Tan ability would also make it dangerous.

Because I read them when I was looking through the codex, and came to that conclusion? That doesn't seem unreasonable.

Also, those don't look like direct quotes, but the verbiage you use here doesn't support your conclusion.

If you have the codex, why not provide actual, full quotes?

[Rapture]

Hum. The whole "counts as" part makes it a difficult question. It will have to be FAQed. Such a simple, cheap tactic that has the (statistically impossible) potential to literally kill the opponent's entire army on the first turn seems far-fetched, but who knows.

[DrLove42]

COunts as is the key thing here

The writhing world scape says "all difficult terrain is also dangerous for the enemy". Emphasis has to be on the terrain

The other two make you "count as" difficult terrain. The open ground doesn't become terrain, the units just have more trouble moving on it because it shaky or their timestream is slowed

I'd say no...they can be used at the same time, but do not stack. I don't have the nec codex, and am only basing this on the wording posted above. If thats what it says, then I stand by my answer

Are these physic powers or persistant things? Because the ability to make an entire army stand still or basically lose 1/6 of everything if they do stack is disgustingly harsh.

[Bean]

COunts as is the key thing here

The writhing world scape says "all difficult terrain is also dangerous for the enemy". Emphasis has to be on the terrain

The other two make you "count as" difficult terrain. The open ground doesn't become terrain, the units just have more trouble moving on it because it shaky or their timestream is slowed

I'd say no...they can be used at the same time, but do not stack. I don't have the nec codex, and am only basing this on the wording posted above. If thats what it says, then I stand by my answer

Are these physic powers or persistant things? Because the ability to make an entire army stand still or basically lose 1/6 of everything if they do stack is disgustingly harsh.

This was basically my reasoning--the writhing worldscape rule affects terrain, and there is no actual terrain to be affected when a unit just counts as moving through difficult terrain.

But, still, I'd be interested in seeing the full text of all of the concerned rules, again.

Also, yes--writing worldscape is a persistent, non-psychic-power, full-board effect. The other two aren't psychic powers, but I'm not sure how persistent they are.

[Demonus]

Tremor Staff says nothing about "count as". It states quite plainly that all open ground is treated as Difficult Ground. With WW, difficult ground is ALSO dangerous.

Now in regards to Temporal Snares, I could see it working either way. The fact that it has additional rules for models "actually moving through difficult terrain" leads me to believe that it does not work together.

I personally will not use the combo with Orikan until FAQ'd as I wouldnt want to try to bend the rules in my favor. Could be a nice combo if it does synergize.

[Hive Mind]

Tremorrstave Quake rule: ...all enemy units hit by a weapon with the Quake type treat open ground as difficult ground...

Temporal Snares: ...all enemy units that move count as moving through difficult terrain.

Writhing Worldsccape: ...all difficult terrain is also dangerous for the enemy.


Those are direct quotes but in this instance Bean is quite correct.

WW makes difficult terrain dangerous but Temporal Snares don't make the terrain difficult, it just counts as difficult.

Tremor Staves however do make the terrain difficult and so would also make it dangerous when combined with WW.

[Bean]

Those are direct quotes but in this instance Bean is quite correct.

WW makes difficult terrain dangerous but Temporal Snares don't make the terrain difficult, it just counts as difficult.

Tremor Staves however do make the terrain difficult and so would also make it dangerous when combined with WW.

Looks about right.

[DrWobbles]

This 'counts as' debate confounds me.

Nowhere in the rule book is there a definition or a difference between 'counts as' or just 'is'. However, if i were to use some homemade piece of terrain in a game my opponent and i would agree it counts as difficult terrain.

I see no difference between this example and the two special rules in question.

[Bean]

It's not that there is a difference between counting as something and being something--the critical element has to do with what counts as what.

In this case, Writhing Worldscape makes terrain count as something, while Temporal Snares makes units count as something. Note the wording:

Writhing Worldsccape: ...all difficult terrain is also dangerous for the enemy.

Temporal Snares: ...all enemy units that move count as moving through difficult terrain.

So, WW makes all extant difficult terrain act as dangerous terrain for the enemy.

Temporal Snares makes all enemy units behave as if they were moving through difficult terrain but doesn't actually create any difficult terrain. Since WW only affects actual terrain, it doesn't really interact with TS at all.


Now, Hive Mind opined above that Tremor Staves actually make open ground difficult and thus get around this problem by actually creating real difficult terrain to be affected by WW, and I initially agreed with this assessment.

Looking at it again, I think I have to rescind that agreement. Like Temporal Snares, Tremor Staves affect a unit. They cause a unit to behave as if moving through difficult terrain when moving through open terrain. They don't actually create difficult terrain--unlike WW, they don't affect the terrain--just the enemy unit.

(Tremor Stave Quake rule: ...all enemy units hit by a weapon with the Quake type treat open ground as difficult ground...)

So, ultimately, I think that neither interacts with WW to create extra dangerous terrain tests. This is not because there is a difference--as far as the unit is concerned--between it counting as moving through difficult terrain and actually moving through difficult terrain. It's because there's a difference--as far as WW is concerned--between real terrain and the terrain-like-effects imparted to units by a "counts as" or "treats as" rule.

[DrWobbles]

Oh, Bean...
You rescinded your initial agreement because it is in your nature to quibble. You've demonstrated in previous threads your dedication to prolonging an argument despite how illogical it may be. Therefore, I have no reason to view your opinion with validity or worth.

[Hive Mind]

"A tremorstave causes shards of rock to burst from the ground, knocking survivors sprawling" p85.

They make the terrain difficult.

[Bean]

Tremorstaves 'cause shards of rock to burst from the ground'. They make the terrain difficult.

Fluff isn't rules.


Oh, Bean...
You rescinded your initial agreement because it is in your nature to quibble. You've demonstrated in previous threads your dedication to prolonging an argument despite how illogical it may be. Therefore, I have no reason to view your opinion with validity or worth.

That's not really true at all. I rescinded it because I realized that it wasn't consistent with the rest of my position, as I describe above. I never knowingly offer illogical arguments simply for the sake of arguing.

You can certainly discount my opinion if you want, but you can't avoid logic--and I think I've shown that logic says you're wrong on this one. You don't have to tackle my opinions, but ignoring me without tackling my argument is just sticking your head in the sand. If you want to stay ignorant because you don't like me, that's your business--but in my experience, it's bad practice to let emotion color reason in that way.

[Hive Mind]

Fluff isn't rules.


Sometimes they are. Plasma weapons, anyone?

Whatever they are, they are a useful resource to use to resolve these types of issues correctly. The RAW here isn't entirely satisfactory so look at what was intended. Temporal Snares are intended to slow a unit down. In that regard, difficult terrain is simply a mechanic utilised to achieve a desired result. At no point does a Temporal Snare actually make the terrain difficult. On the other hand, the intention of the tremorstave rules are to represent a unit being whipped around by the debris of a concussive energy blast, thus actually making the terrain difficult.

[Bean]

Sometimes they are. Plasma weapons, anyone?

A fair point, but not really a comparable one. Here, the plasma siphon specifically reference a fluff term, and GW went ahead and put out an FAQ just to make sure we knew that yes, they really did want that rule to reference a fluff term.

That isn't really the case with Quake and WW--neither refers to a fluff term. Both stick to rules terms. The Plasma Siphon is really the specifically-noted exception that proves the rule, in this case.




Whatever they are, they are a useful resource to use to resolve these types of issues correctly. The RAW here isn't entirely satisfactory so look at what was intended. Temporal Snares are intended to slow a unit down. In that regard, difficult terrain is simply a mechanic utilised to achieve a desired result. At no point does a Temporal Snare actually make the terrain difficult. On the other hand, the intention of the tremorstave rules are to represent a unit being whipped around by the debris of a concussive energy blast, thus actually making the terrain difficult.

I disagree on a fairly fundamental level. They're a useful resource when coming up with house-rules to cover perceived or actual gaps in the extant rules--but that doesn't really constitute a "resolution" in my book.

They don't have any bearing on what the rule actually says, and that's generally all I'm interested in.

After all, any house-rules you come up with will have to be explained to and cleared by any opponents you play against anyway--a discussion forum doesn't really do anything for you on that front.

As it stands, Temporal Snare and Quake say effectively the same thing--thus, they should interact the with WW in the same way. While I still entertain some amount of doubt as to what that way is (I like my explanation above, generally, but I do have reservations about it), I don't think fluff constitutes a good reason to treat them differently.

[thecactusman17]

Actually, Tremorstaves DO affect the ground. And previous rulings I've read and understood to affect "counts as" the same as whatever is being counted.

Tremorstaves, according to the ruling, actually DO make the unit move through difficult terrain, though it is localized to the immediate unit in question. The open ground is treated as difficult terrain for the next movement phase. The type of terrain itself has changed when a particular unit tries to move. This is a critical aspect.

As for "counts as," this is something that I've always treated as essentially doing the same thing. Vulkan He'Stan, for example, makes all flamers, meltas, and thunder hammers "count as" twin linked or master-crafted, as appropriate. Even those these models aren't actually weapons with those rules, they count as having those rules. So if the models affected by Orikan "count as" moving through difficult terrain, then they must be moving through difficult terrain. If they would move through terrain that would normally require a difficult terrain check, then they would move even slower.

Here's a question to answer: if you moved jump infantry or bike infantry after these abilities, would you take a dangerous terrain check for them? Because if you did, then it stands to reason that the terrain actually counts as difficult for purposes of that movement.

[Hive Mind]

Cue three pages of droning on about sentence structure and language.

Crack on, Bean. I'll just sit here, save my keyboard springs and be right once the FAQ comes out. Again.

[Bean]

Cue three pages of droning on about sentence structure and language.

The rules are written. They're examples of language--of sentences, even. Sentence structure and language are highly appropriate topics in rules discussions.


Crack on, Bean. I'll just sit here, save my keyboard springs and be right once the FAQ comes out. Again.

It's odd that you should bring this up, since, of course, I was right about that other issue, too. In fact, the nature of our disagreement was surprisingly slight, and if the Errata weighed in on it one or the other (and let's be fair--it didn't, really) it weighed in on my side--signalling GW's agreement with my assertion that the text of the rule needed to be changed.

I'm just not sure how you can hold that up as an example of a comparative triumph. In all of the ways you were correct, I was also correct. In the one way we differed, the errata supported my position and not yours.

[Gir]

Nowhere in the rule book is there a definition or a difference between 'counts as' or just 'is'. However, if i were to use some homemade piece of terrain in a game my opponent and i would agree it counts as difficult terrain.


You sir, win the thread. All difficult terrain is just terrain that the players have agreed on being dangerous, which makes it count as.

Also, if it counts as difficult terrain, that means that it uses ALL the rules of difficult terrain, so when all difficult becomes dangerous, it ALL becomes dangerous. You can't just pick and choose parts of the rules.

[thecactusman17]

Wobbles wins. Bean and Hive Mind can fight over the scraps if they like.