Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

I know this has probably been asked several times before, but as I've never used or played against a drop pod, just wondering, as I can't see any rules against (although I may well be wrong)

Can a unit charge after disembarking a drop pod?

While the Drop Pod is Open-topped, it does not give permission to charge when coming in from Reserves or Deep Striking (both of which the unit inside is doing).

Is the drop pod an assault vehicle and does the unit have a rule that allows them to assault after deepstriking?

The answer is no, Beard. (Sorry.) Standard drop pods do not allow you to bypass the 'cannot assault the turn you arrive from reserve' rule.

There IS, however, a drop pod from Forgeworld which DOES allow you to assault the turn you disembark from it. You may want to look into that a little more. I'm sure someone more familiar with it can provide you with more details.

Lucius pattern DP, IA:Aeronautica has the most up to date rules, from memory

And it´s only for Dreadnaughts.

Beard wrote:
I know this has probably been asked several times before, but as I've never used or played against a drop pod, just wondering, as I can't see any rules against

The bolded part betrays a misunderstanding.

Please, take a moment to appreciate how the rules are written - as it will be helpful in any future rules discussions.

The rules of WH40K shows you what you are allowed to do.
In order to do anything in the game - perform an action or buy an option for a unit - you need an specific permission to do so by the rules.
Anything not specifically allowed is simply not an allowed action and cannot be performed.

- This is known as being a Permissive rule-set (though some people use another term for it).

This contrasts with the way the laws are written in most countries.
In law you have a set number of restrictions, and you are allowed to do whatever you like - perform any action - as long as you can't be presented with a law that prevents you from taking that action.

- This is known as a Restrictive rule-set.

When you say;" The codex wasn't specific against it" you are appealing to the "wrong" kind of rule-set.

Even simpler than that, 6th edition explicitly prohibits assault after deep-striking or arriving from reserves.

Black Templars can stay inside thier pods when they deepstrike, there is no rule telling them to manditory disembark. So they can land shoot out of the pod, have an av12 bunker for a turn, than assault out of it next turn.
Page 22 – Drop Pod Assault.
Replace this entry with the following rules:
“Drop Pod Assault: Drop Pods must enter play using the Deep
Strike rules. At the beginning of your first turn, choose half of
your Drop Pods (rounding up) to make a ‘Drop Pod Assault’.
Units making a Drop Pod Assault arrive on their controlling
player’s first turn. The arrival of the remaining Drop Pods is
rolled for as normal. A unit that Deep Strikes via Drop Pod
cannot charge in the turn it arrives.

Immobile: A Drop Pod cannot move once it has entered the
battle, and counts in all respects as a vehicle that has suffered
an Immobilised damage result that cannot be repaired in any
way.

Inertial Guidance System: Should a Drop Pod scatter on top of
impassable terrain or another model (friend or foe) then
reduce the scatter distance by the minimum required in order
to avoid the obstacle. Note that if a Drop Pod scatters off the
edge of the board then they will suffer a Deep Strike Mishap as
per the Warhammer 40,000 rulebook.”

This is clearly a GW fumble but strict RAW black templars can use this tactic. The bolded part is the most importent part. Nothing says to disembark like the codex text. And that is replaced.

Goat, whilst I applaud your audacity, I do wonder what reaction you would get if you tried to pull that off in an actual game.

 SoloFalcon1138 wrote:
Even simpler than that, 6th edition explicitly prohibits assault after deep-striking or arriving from reserves.

I do not disagree with you. I am simply addressing another issue.

 dangermouse425 wrote:
Goat, whilst I applaud your audacity, I do wonder what reaction you would get if you tried to pull that off in an actual game.

Why is it audacious to play within the rules?

It's audacious because you're using what appears to be a mistake in rules-writing to change the way in which an established unit functions. Every other Drop Pod functions one way, there is no reason for BT Pods to function differently.

 dangermouse425 wrote:
It's audacious because you're using what appears to be a mistake in rules-writing to change the way in which an established unit functions. Every other Drop Pod functions one way, there is no reason for BT Pods to function differently.

Haha, I agree. If my opponent insisted he's allowed to stay in his pod if he wished it. I wouldn't get poopy pants about it. That's just not how I roll. And it's clearly within the poorly writen rules of this game we love.

 dangermouse425 wrote:
It's audacious because you're using what appears to be a mistake in rules-writing to change the way in which an established unit functions. Every other Drop Pod functions one way, there is no reason for BT Pods to function differently.

If had appeared to be a mistake, don't you think they would have fixed it by now?

The FAQ that changed the entry came out in January. That is roughly 4+ months ago!
This was brought up almost immediately after that FAQ was released and no doubt emails have gone out to GW about it, yet no change has become of it.

Space Marine Biker are different from Dark Angel Bikers. Grey Knight Terminators are different from Black Templar Termies and so on...
This game has models that are both similar and different. I cannot know GW intent but, their lack of "fixing it" pretty much cements BT Drop Pods as uniquely different from other Drop Pods in the game and that is perfectly fine.

Black Templars is a Codex for the Rule Lawyers. As it is such an old Codex. Now i Hate Rule Lawyers, Like that guy on Beasts of War with his Cheese Hunters Segment. But Again, the Codex always over writes the Rule Book. Meaning YES you could stay in the Drop Pod. But It would be interesting to hear what a Torny Judge would say about it.

But as of the OP. No you cannot charge from a drop pod the turn it arrives. As the drop pod and all units inside are classed as having Deep Striked.

40k-noob wrote:

 dangermouse425 wrote:
It's audacious because you're using what appears to be a mistake in rules-writing to change the way in which an established unit functions. Every other Drop Pod functions one way, there is no reason for BT Pods to function differently.

If had appeared to be a mistake, don't you think they would have fixed it by now?

Due to a typo, camo cloaks gave the Imperial Guard +2 to their cover saves for a good long while. Due to a type, technically speaking, Flying Monstrous Creatures STILL don't have either the Relentless or Smash rules. (The comma is missing in the sentence in the BRB, meaning they only have a single rule called 'Relentless Smash,' which try as I might I can never find )

I'm fine with the occasional use of exploitative rules interpretation for a friendly game. If someone tried to use the Black Templar fortress-pod against me this week, I'd laugh and totally allow it. That being said, if it came up in a tournament I was administrating, I would rule that the omission is clearly a typo, and disallow it.

BRB sez: No Assault after DS, BRB overrules all!

 Jimsolo wrote:

40k-noob wrote:

 dangermouse425 wrote:
It's audacious because you're using what appears to be a mistake in rules-writing to change the way in which an established unit functions. Every other Drop Pod functions one way, there is no reason for BT Pods to function differently.

If had appeared to be a mistake, don't you think they would have fixed it by now?

Due to a typo, camo cloaks gave the Imperial Guard +2 to their cover saves for a good long while. Due to a type, technically speaking, Flying Monstrous Creatures STILL don't have either the Relentless or Smash rules. (The comma is missing in the sentence in the BRB, meaning they only have a single rule called 'Relentless Smash,' which try as I might I can never find )

I'm fine with the occasional use of exploitative rules interpretation for a friendly game. If someone tried to use the Black Templar fortress-pod against me this week, I'd laugh and totally allow it. That being said, if it came up in a tournament I was administrating, I would rule that the omission is clearly a typo, and disallow it.

Leaving out a Comma is a typo, typing a 2 instead of a 1 is a typo, but leaving out a huge portion of a rule, while correcting a rule(i.e. what an Errata is) is not a typo.
I do not think it is fair to compare typo's to what has happened to BT Drop Pods.

 Jimsolo wrote:
Due to a type, technically speaking, Flying Monstrous Creatures STILL don't have either the Relentless or Smash rules. (The comma is missing in the sentence in the BRB, meaning they only have a single rule called 'Relentless Smash,' which try as I might I can never find )

Really? My brb reads "Monstrous Creatures have the Fear, Hammer of Wrath, Move Through Cover, Relentless and Smash special rules." P. 48

It says Relentless and Smash, not Relentless Smash.

 DeathReaper wrote:

 Jimsolo wrote:
Due to a type, technically speaking, Flying Monstrous Creatures STILL don't have either the Relentless or Smash rules. (The comma is missing in the sentence in the BRB, meaning they only have a single rule called 'Relentless Smash,' which try as I might I can never find )

Really? My brb reads "Monstrous Creatures have the Fear, Hammer of Wrath, Move Through Cover, Relentless and Smash special rules." P. 48

It says Relentless and Smash, not Relentless Smash.

The big full sized BRB has the typo.

Drop pods are open topped? So +1 on the vehicle damage table? I have been shorting myself vs pods.

40k-noob wrote:
If had appeared to be a mistake, don't you think they would have fixed it by now?

The FAQ that changed the entry came out in January. That is roughly 4+ months ago!

How long has 6th edition been out now? And they still haven't fixed Shrike's ability to infiltrate with a unit...

That's one of the frustrating things about GW... They release FAQs and errata that deal with things that nobody ever had a problem with, or change rules that functioned just fine as is... and ignore actual issues for years on end.

40k-noob wrote:

 DeathReaper wrote:

 Jimsolo wrote:
Due to a type, technically speaking, Flying Monstrous Creatures STILL don't have either the Relentless or Smash rules. (The comma is missing in the sentence in the BRB, meaning they only have a single rule called 'Relentless Smash,' which try as I might I can never find )

Really? My brb reads "Monstrous Creatures have the Fear, Hammer of Wrath, Move Through Cover, Relentless and Smash special rules." P. 48

It says Relentless and Smash, not Relentless Smash.

The big full sized BRB has the typo.

I took that line out of the full sized book.

Did they change print editions or something?

40k-noob wrote:

 dangermouse425 wrote:
It's audacious because you're using what appears to be a mistake in rules-writing to change the way in which an established unit functions. Every other Drop Pod functions one way, there is no reason for BT Pods to function differently.

If had appeared to be a mistake, don't you think they would have fixed it by now?

Cool. Well enjoy using your BT Drop Pods in a strangely unique fashion, let us know how it goes.

 dangermouse425 wrote:

40k-noob wrote:

 dangermouse425 wrote:
It's audacious because you're using what appears to be a mistake in rules-writing to change the way in which an established unit functions. Every other Drop Pod functions one way, there is no reason for BT Pods to function differently.

If had appeared to be a mistake, don't you think they would have fixed it by now?

Cool. Well enjoy using your BT Drop Pods in a strangely unique fashion, let us know how it goes.

I dont play BT. But I wont hold it against another player that does, simply because he is trying to make the most effective use out of his codex's rules.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 DeathReaper wrote:

40k-noob wrote:

 DeathReaper wrote:

 Jimsolo wrote:
Due to a type, technically speaking, Flying Monstrous Creatures STILL don't have either the Relentless or Smash rules. (The comma is missing in the sentence in the BRB, meaning they only have a single rule called 'Relentless Smash,' which try as I might I can never find )

Really? My brb reads "Monstrous Creatures have the Fear, Hammer of Wrath, Move Through Cover, Relentless and Smash special rules." P. 48

It says Relentless and Smash, not Relentless Smash.

The big full sized BRB has the typo.

I took that line out of the full sized book.

Did they change print editions or something?

LOL i must have the "Made in China" version then.

 DeathReaper wrote:

40k-noob wrote:

 DeathReaper wrote:

 Jimsolo wrote:
Due to a type, technically speaking, Flying Monstrous Creatures STILL don't have either the Relentless or Smash rules. (The comma is missing in the sentence in the BRB, meaning they only have a single rule called 'Relentless Smash,' which try as I might I can never find )

Really? My brb reads "Monstrous Creatures have the Fear, Hammer of Wrath, Move Through Cover, Relentless and Smash special rules." P. 48

It says Relentless and Smash, not Relentless Smash.

The big full sized BRB has the typo.

I took that line out of the full sized book.

Did they change print editions or something?

No, you are correct. Monstrous Creatures is listed correctly as having "Relentless and Smash". FLYING monstrous Creatures on the other hand have "Relentless Smash" (BRB p 49, bottom right "Special Rules").

 Goat wrote:
Black Templars can stay inside thier pods when they deepstrike, there is no rule telling them to manditory disembark. So they can land shoot out of the pod, have an av12 bunker for a turn, than assault out of it next turn.
Page 22 – Drop Pod Assault.
Replace this entry with the following rules:
“Drop Pod Assault: Drop Pods must enter play using the Deep
Strike rules. At the beginning of your first turn, choose half of
your Drop Pods (rounding up) to make a ‘Drop Pod Assault’.
Units making a Drop Pod Assault arrive on their controlling
player’s first turn. The arrival of the remaining Drop Pods is
rolled for as normal. A unit that Deep Strikes via Drop Pod
cannot charge in the turn it arrives.

Immobile: A Drop Pod cannot move once it has entered the
battle, and counts in all respects as a vehicle that has suffered
an Immobilised damage result that cannot be repaired in any
way.

Inertial Guidance System: Should a Drop Pod scatter on top of
impassable terrain or another model (friend or foe) then
reduce the scatter distance by the minimum required in order
to avoid the obstacle. Note that if a Drop Pod scatters off the
edge of the board then they will suffer a Deep Strike Mishap as
per the Warhammer 40,000 rulebook.”

This is clearly a GW fumble but strict RAW black templars can use this tactic. The bolded part is the most importent part. Nothing says to disembark like the codex text. And that is replaced.

I fail to see anywhere that states you can sit inside, shoot, and then assault next turn. How do you even draw los if the hatches are not blown like other codices state?

 Billmurry666 wrote:
I fail to see anywhere that states you can sit inside, shoot, and then assault next turn. How do you even draw los if the hatches are not blown like other codices state?

Where are the rule for "blowing the hatches"? Drop Pods are open-topped vehicles and as such follow the rules for open-topped vehicles. Every other codex has a rule that says the unit must disembark and nobody can embark. BT have no such rule that the unit must disembark, but does have a rule allowing the unit that dropped in the pod from re-embarking (though other units can embark).

 Billmurry666 wrote:

 Goat wrote:
Black Templars can stay inside thier pods when they deepstrike, there is no rule telling them to manditory disembark. So they can land shoot out of the pod, have an av12 bunker for a turn, than assault out of it next turn.
Page 22 – Drop Pod Assault.
Replace this entry with the following rules:
“Drop Pod Assault: Drop Pods must enter play using the Deep
Strike rules. At the beginning of your first turn, choose half of
your Drop Pods (rounding up) to make a ‘Drop Pod Assault’.
Units making a Drop Pod Assault arrive on their controlling
player’s first turn. The arrival of the remaining Drop Pods is
rolled for as normal. A unit that Deep Strikes via Drop Pod
cannot charge in the turn it arrives.

Immobile: A Drop Pod cannot move once it has entered the
battle, and counts in all respects as a vehicle that has suffered
an Immobilised damage result that cannot be repaired in any
way.

Inertial Guidance System: Should a Drop Pod scatter on top of
impassable terrain or another model (friend or foe) then
reduce the scatter distance by the minimum required in order
to avoid the obstacle. Note that if a Drop Pod scatters off the
edge of the board then they will suffer a Deep Strike Mishap as
per the Warhammer 40,000 rulebook.”

This is clearly a GW fumble but strict RAW black templars can use this tactic. The bolded part is the most importent part. Nothing says to disembark like the codex text. And that is replaced.

I fail to see anywhere that states you can sit inside, shoot, and then assault next turn. How do you even draw los if the hatches are not blown like other codices state?

You can sit in a transport as long as you want until a rule compels you to leave or you choose too. How is this any different that orks staying in a trukk?