After 11 pages of repeating the same rules over again, I think I'm going to head off. I will leave you with this thought, as @Gravmyr has asked.
The BRB rule says that "A Chariot is an unusual unit with a dual profile - a non vehicle profile for the rider of the Chariot (see below), and a vehicle profile for the Chariot itself. However a Chariot is always treated as a single model."
Let's break that down, because I think I've realised what the difference in positions is.
In the first sentence, there is some confusion about the word "profile". There is an example provided in the rulebook (that is the "see below" reference), and the diagram provided is clearly a characteristic profile. We are all familiar with characteristic profiles, and we all, I guess, associate them with a "model". However, characteristic profiles are just part of the "model" - other things like weapons, wargear etc make up the "model" that we move around the table. Within a "model" and separate to the characteristic profile, special rules are also collected.
So, the first issue is that I'm using the premise that a single model (in this case the Chariot) is entitled to have 2 characteristic profiles and that these characteristic profiles don't affect weapons, wargear or special rules. The pro joining group don't agree with this.
The second and main issue is the word "However" at the beginning of the second sentence. For me, it is clear that "However" effectively means "Even though the Chariot has 2 characteristic profiles". So the second sentence I'm interpreting as "Even though the Chariot has 2 characteristic profiles a Chariot is always treated as a single model."
Why does this make sense to me? Couple of reasons:
a) The reference to a rider model as part of the everliving rule for me clearly indicates that GW was not proposing that there was only one model, only that we were to treat the dual characteristic profiles as one model.
b) Special rules can only be assigned to models, per the rulebook. That is such a basic tenet that it seems to me to be very strange that GW would make such a basic mistake throughout the rest of the Chariot rules. Because in the rest of the Chariot rules, they routinely allocate special rules to the Rider. Now, that's consistent with the existence of a separate Rider model (as referred to in the everliving rule) - but not consistent with the pro joining argument that only a rider "profile" exists.
c) Rules are allocated to the Rider, which are clearly inconsistent with a vehicle. Challenges and Overwatch are examples, IC is the other one.
d) There is a clear example of a model with a single characteristic profile, but two separate sets of rules/abilities which can't be shared. I'm, of course, referring to fateweaver. This highlights for me that a characteristic profile is not a "model".
It's clear that we are going in circles, so we can do this for another 100 pages. But I'm going to leave that to someone else
@grav - Having two separate models does not create a problem from a movement perspective. The unit type is chariot, the Overlord is mounted and can't get away - it moves like a skimmer.
@milkboy : I did actually discuss this in my local GW today, and the clear consensus was that it the reference to "always treat as a single model" was to characteristic profiles. Hence, no IC.
Peace and chill to you too, in fact to all who have participated here.
I argue and believe that I have been arguing that a Chariot model is one model with two profiles however, it seems that I have been confusing people on how I have come to that conclusion while still allowing the CCB to join units through the IS USR.
I argue that a Profile includes Statline, Wargear, and USR's.
My Evidence is found in the Dark Angels Codex on Page 58 "Sableclaw: Should you choose to field Sammael mounted on his Land Speeder instead of his Jetbike. The Following Profile is used instead." That profile includes, USR's and Wargear for Sableclaw, as was the unit type Vehicle (Fast, Skimmer). If you only counted the statline as the profile then Sableclaw would not have any wargear, Chapter Relics, USR's or unit Type.
Now as we Already know as per page 86 of the BRB that. "A Chariot is a unusual unit with a duel profile - a non-vehicle profile for the rider of the Chariot (See below), and a vehicle profile for the Chariot itself. However, a Chariot is always treated as a single model."
We are instructed to treat both of these profiles as one model, an example is that when either the rider is killed or the Chariot is destroyed you remove the entire model. An other example is if the rider has a USR that allows it to return to battle after being removed as a casualty then the Chariot is also returned to play.
I argue that a Chariot is not given permission to fire overwatch. BRB Page 78 "Vehicle and Overwatch: Unless specified otherwise, vehicles cannot make overwatch fire." Where as the rider is given permission to overwatch Page 87 BRB: "A Rider can fire overwatch if its Chariot is charged, but it cannot shoot any of the weapons mounted on the Chariot itself." Thus permission is given for the rider but not the Chariot. Note that Overwatch is not a USR.
So how do we handle a Model that has two sets of profiles active at all times. Orikan the Diviner has one or the other profile active, but not both profiles active at one time(And both profiles have the exact same USR's), and Fate Weaver's profiles are chosen by its controller but are not active at the same time, while having the exact same USR's active. What we have in the Chariot model are two Profiles that are always one model, that are active at the same time with different sets of USR's active at the same time.
Again I use Bikes as an example.
back in 5th ed Bikes had a duel profile (Or one profile with duel stats) where one profile was t4 and one was t5, this caused confusion and in 6th and 7th ed was fixed to remove said confusion.
A Bike has the Hammer of Wrath, Jink, Relentless and Very Bulky USR's (Page 63 BRB.)
A Character that can take a Bike, may have the. And They Shall Know No Fear, Chapter Tactics, and Independent Character USR,s (SM Codex page 164: Captain)
When the Bike profile is combined with the Captain profile making it one model. the Captain gains all the benefits and restrictions of the bikes USR's where as the bike gains all the benefits and restrictions of the Captain USR's. The Bike cannot be taken without the captain where as the Captain can be taken without the bike.
Now to parallel with a Overlord and a CCB.
The CCB has the Living Metal, Sweep Attack, Symbiotic Repair, Jink, Relentless, Fearless, Hammer of Wrath D6USR's.
The OverLord has the, Ever-Living, Independent Character, and Reanimation Protocols. USR's.
When the Overlord is combined with the CCB making it one model, the Overlord gains all the Benefits and restrictions from the CCBUSR's, while the CCB gains all the benefits and restrictions from the Overlord's USR's. The CCB cannot be taken without an Overlord where as a Overlord can be tank without a CCB.
Just as a SM Captain is counted as a Bike Model when taking a Bike, so to is the Overlord counted as a Chariot model when taking a CCB, and just as the USR's from the Bike and Captain combined, so to do the USR's of the Overlord and CCB combined.
Thus a Overlord riding a CCB will retain all of it's USR's, Thus can join a unit while abiding by the restriction given by the ICUSR.
MarkCron - I think you are ducking out because you are realizing that your argument falls apart.
Your argument makes sense only if you take out all the mumbo jumbo about there being a dual profile and single model. That definitional line serves no purpose in your line of reasoning. Your argument is that basically there are 2 models. So there is this whole definitional statement at the top of the Chariot section that breaks from your reading that stands out as making no sense and being totally irrelevant to how you see a Chariot. If there are two models, why bother saying dual profile treated as single model? If we follow your line of reasoning there is no way we can make sense of everything that is included in the Chariot section. Basically we have to ignore the whole discussion of profiles since its not needed if we are actually dealing with models.
The key difference is that you are insisting on a narrow definition of the profile as strictly and only characteristics in all circumstances. However, a profile can refer to more than just characteristics. Once you wrap your mind around that, everything falls into place and makes sense. Basically, everything that is on the Necron Overlord Necron Army List entry goes into the rider profile and everything that is on the CCB Army list entry goes into the vehicle profile.
col_impact wrote: MarkCron - I think you are ducking out because you are realizing that your argument falls apart.
When someone backs out of a discussion, for whatever reason, he should be able to do so without getting provoked. It's not cool to beat someone who's down already.
col_impact wrote: MarkCron - I think you are ducking out because you are realizing that your argument falls apart.
When someone backs out of a discussion, for whatever reason, he should be able to do so without getting provoked. It's not cool to beat someone who's down already.
True. I retract that bit.
Automatically Appended Next Post: Okay since we resolved the profile issue, it seems that we now have a solid case for a RAW argument that the CCB can join units.
Is it RAI? It's shakey at best to say that it's clearly RAI since the wound allocation part opens up a can of worms, and areas where if you literally follow the rules you get stuck.
However, let's assume you just resolve hits in a commonsensical fashion, is the CCB overpowered if its allowed to join groups?
It's self-limiting since other IC can't join the group.
It also seems to me that since you lose LOS, its only a moderate boost in power. Losing LOS is a huge nerf.
Clearly the rules allow for the CCB to be an IC. But does anyone actually think GW will FAQ this and agree? I hope they do but I seriously doubt that they will.
An interesting combo is a CCB Overlord with Phaeron that joins a unit of Wraiths with transdimensional beamers.
Not sure if it's good, but it's interesting. It might have application against Deathstars because it circumvents the normal save pathflow, so against units with rerollable invul saves, etc.. Basically, after you hit any 6 causes a random model loss in a unit. So it's lackluster unless the unit you are going against is super hard to put down by conventional means, then its actually really good.
People have basically never taken the transdimensional beamers on the Wraiths because you could never give them relentless, until now!
Mythra wrote: I don't understand why they would take it away from demons and leave Necrons alone. Unless they consider a demon on a chariot too OP.
it might have to do with WHFB Chariot rules as Daemons are in both games.
Perhaps it could be because Daemons have chariot units? For a CCB to join a group of warriors, it is hampering itself more due to the mobility loss. There are only a few viable units to join to retain mobility. Even wraiths will not allow the CCB full mobility due to their differences in the run/flat out step. In 6th there was disagreement as to whether a mixed unit of bikes and infantry can run and turbo/boost (in an eldar thread I think)
Thus the only unit to join while remaining mobility are tomb blades. And tomb blades do not add much to the abilities of the CCB, as CCB alone already does enough damage. With no Look out sir for the CCB, the only advantage is protection of e tomb blades vs small arms I guess.
Yea, I am looking for any broken combos that could be unleashed if a CCB overlord joins units and I am not finding any.
There aren't too many instances where an opposing player would want to shoot the unit that is being shielded by the CCB Overlord rather than the CCB Overlord himself. I imagine it might be a strong strategy to taxi a unit of wraiths to a Tau gunline using a CCB Overlord, but that just seems strong and not broken, and Tau certainly have the strength of fire to have a decent chance of cutting down the CCB Overlord.
Maybe you could use the CCB Overlord to taxi a unit of scarabs to a group of enemy vehicles. Strong tactic, sure, but not broken.
Looks like it unleashes some interesting tactical lines of play, but nothing broken or unfair.
The loss of LOS really does seem to keep this in check and the fact that you are prohibited from adding any more ICs to the unit also keeps it well under control.
col_impact wrote: Yea, I am looking for any broken combos that could be unleashed if a CCB overlord joins units and I am not finding any.
There aren't too many instances where an opposing player would want to shoot the unit that is being shielded by the CCB Overlord rather than the CCB Overlord himself. I imagine it might be a strong strategy to taxi a unit of wraiths to a Tau gunline using a CCB Overlord, but that just seems strong and not broken, and Tau certainly have the strength of fire to have a decent chance of cutting down the CCB Overlord.
Maybe you could use the CCB Overlord to taxi a unit of scarabs to a group of enemy vehicles. Strong tactic, sure, but not broken.
Looks like it unleashes some interesting tactical lines of play, but nothing broken or unfair.
The loss of LOS really does seem to keep this in check and the fact that you are prohibited from adding any more ICs to the unit also keeps it well under control.
The strength in this combo lies in what generally takes down a D. Lord, which is volume of fire and that is generally the lower S shots. If a CCB can join wraiths or scarabs, the the CCB can fly at the front and allocate small arms fire to the barge, which will just bounce off the 13 Armour of the quantum shielding. Higher S shots can be LoS to a wraith or allocated to the rider( or even just stay with the CCB as everything will now have a 3++ inv. save in a Wraith unit. The D. Lord in the past would tank with his 2+ save but had no inv. so volume of fire would generally widel down the D lords wounds, or you lose a few wraiths before reaching combat.
The Phaeron option giving relentless to wraiths does make the transdimensional Beamer very interesting...
col_impact wrote: Yea, I am looking for any broken combos that could be unleashed if a CCB overlord joins units and I am not finding any.
There aren't too many instances where an opposing player would want to shoot the unit that is being shielded by the CCB Overlord rather than the CCB Overlord himself. I imagine it might be a strong strategy to taxi a unit of wraiths to a Tau gunline using a CCB Overlord, but that just seems strong and not broken, and Tau certainly have the strength of fire to have a decent chance of cutting down the CCB Overlord.
Maybe you could use the CCB Overlord to taxi a unit of scarabs to a group of enemy vehicles. Strong tactic, sure, but not broken.
Looks like it unleashes some interesting tactical lines of play, but nothing broken or unfair.
The loss of LOS really does seem to keep this in check and the fact that you are prohibited from adding any more ICs to the unit also keeps it well under control.
The strength in this combo lies in what generally takes down a D. Lord, which is volume of fire and that is generally the lower S shots. If a CCB can join wraiths or scarabs, the the CCB can fly at the front and allocate small arms fire to the barge, which will just bounce off the 13 Armour of the quantum shielding. Higher S shots can be LoS to a wraith or allocated to the rider( or even just stay with the CCB as everything will now have a 3++ inv. save in a Wraith unit. The D. Lord in the past would tank with his 2+ save but had no inv. so volume of fire would generally widel down the D lords wounds, or you lose a few wraiths before reaching combat.
The Phaeron option giving relentless to wraiths does make the transdimensional Beamer very interesting...
I do need to Correct this.
As per Page 100 BRB. 'When a wound is allocated to one of your non-vehicle characters". As the Overlord is now unit type Chariot when upgraded to a CCB he is restricted from making LOS as he now counts as a vehicle Character. Thus he cannot LOS high Str Wounds allocated against the Overlord.
Yea, the loss of LOS is a huge nerf to the benefits of joining a unit for the CCB Overlord.
All in all, when a CCB Overlord joins a unit, its seems . . . . balanced. He gives up mobility and ablative LOS armor for the ability to shield a unit. No brokenness spotted so far. Just a better D Lord, which is not surprising since it costs a bunch more and the boost in power is commensurate with the boost in cost.
col_impact wrote: Yea, I am looking for any broken combos that could be unleashed if a CCB overlord joins units and I am not finding any.
There aren't too many instances where an opposing player would want to shoot the unit that is being shielded by the CCB Overlord rather than the CCB Overlord himself. I imagine it might be a strong strategy to taxi a unit of wraiths to a Tau gunline using a CCB Overlord, but that just seems strong and not broken, and Tau certainly have the strength of fire to have a decent chance of cutting down the CCB Overlord.
Maybe you could use the CCB Overlord to taxi a unit of scarabs to a group of enemy vehicles. Strong tactic, sure, but not broken.
Looks like it unleashes some interesting tactical lines of play, but nothing broken or unfair.
The loss of LOS really does seem to keep this in check and the fact that you are prohibited from adding any more ICs to the unit also keeps it well under control.
The strength in this combo lies in what generally takes down a D. Lord, which is volume of fire and that is generally the lower S shots. If a CCB can join wraiths or scarabs, the the CCB can fly at the front and allocate small arms fire to the barge, which will just bounce off the 13 Armour of the quantum shielding. Higher S shots can be LoS to a wraith or allocated to the rider( or even just stay with the CCB as everything will now have a 3++ inv. save in a Wraith unit. The D. Lord in the past would tank with his 2+ save but had no inv. so volume of fire would generally widel down the D lords wounds, or you lose a few wraiths before reaching combat.
The Phaeron option giving relentless to wraiths does make the transdimensional Beamer very interesting...
I do need to Correct this.
As per Page 100 BRB. 'When a wound is allocated to one of your non-vehicle characters". As the Overlord is now unit type Chariot when upgraded to a CCB he is restricted from making LOS as he now counts as a vehicle Character. Thus he cannot LOS high Str Wounds allocated against the Overlord.
Not true, as the controlling player I can choose to allocate the shot to either the non-vehicle profile of my rider, which can LoS, or the chariot profile which is a vehicle.
col_impact wrote: Sure, but ask yourself what model type and what unit type is the rider a profile for?
The profile is for an Overlord which can select a CCB to which he becomes the non-vehicle rider for. You as the attacker cannot target my rider seperately from the chariot as a unit. However, per the rules also on page 86, as the controlling player I choose to allocate the hits to either the non- vehicle rider(which is an IC and capable of LoS) or the chariot (which is a vehicle and not eligible for LoS).
I believe you are confusing the model type change in the FAQ as it referes to the CCB being a vehicle(chariot), the unit type of an overlord selecting a CCB doesn't change he simply becomes the rider for the chariot.
With Chariots we are told explicitly that we are dealing with one model. So a wound is allocated to the Chariot and LOS can be taken.And LOS applies to the model. So what is the model and unit type of the Chariot?
col_impact wrote: With Chariots we are told explicitly that we are dealing with one model. So a wound is allocated to the Chariot and LOS can be taken.And LOS applies to the model. So what is the model and unit type of the Chariot?
it is a dual profile unit, one of which is a vehicle, the other a non vehicle. As the controlling player I choose which profile to allocate hits to.
Page 100 also explicitly states that LoS applies to non-vehicle characters. It never factors in unit or model type. Is the rider of a CCB infantry, no. Is he a non-vehicle character? Very specifically, yes.
Wounds are allocated to models. And then LOS may kick in if it can apply. In the case of the Chariot a wound is being allocated to a vehicle that is also an IC. The rider is just a profile and so cannot have wounds allocated to it. The Chariot rules specify using the rider profile to allocate hits.
col_impact wrote: With Chariots we are told explicitly that we are dealing with one model. So a wound is allocated to the Chariot and LOS can be taken.And LOS applies to the model. So what is the model and unit type of the Chariot?
it is a dual profile unit, one of which is a vehicle, the other a non vehicle. As the controlling player I choose which profile to allocate hits to.
Page 100 also explicitly states that LoS applies to non-vehicle characters. It never factors in unit or model type. Is the rider of a CCB infantry, no. Is he a non-vehicle character? Very specifically, yes.
This is wrong. The rules and restrictions of both profiles on the model must be taken into account. This has been the entire reason this thread has been going on so long.
The Overlord part of the profile has IC which means it is normally entitled to a LOS.
The CCB part of the profile is a vehicle which is not entitled to a LOS.
We are instructed to treat these two profiles as one model, thus we have a IC that is also a Vehicle.
The Overlord with a CCB upgrade is a Vehicle Character and thus is not entitled to a LOS due to the restriction given in the LOS rule set.
Dual profile single model unit. One is an IC Infantry that becomes the "Rider", the other is a Vehicle.
We have no permission for vehicles to join units unless they are vehicle squadrons., even then they have to be bought as squadrons.
But, IC have permission to join units.
Does IC override vehicle rules? Does IC transfer to the vehicle half of the Profile? We really aren't given the tools to completely rectify this problem.
IC tells us that special rules do not transfer unless they are told they do. IC is one such rule that doesn't transfer to its unit. Only half, the Rider has the IC rule which does not transfer to the rest of the unit. It has two profiles, each with their own special rules which don't necessarily transfer to the rest of the unit. Here is a lot of precedent for keeping or seep rating portions of the single model dual profile unit.
The Disembarking language, "A Rider cannot disembark from his chariot." If it cannot disembark, it is some how unclearly defined as embarked. An embarked IC could not join a unit without disembarking, etc.
It's messy....
I feel the situation is very unclear but has established precedence in the Chaos Daemons Codex, where Heralds, ICs, are given the option to take Chariots becoming the riders. They have been errated to lose their Independent Character Status. I imagine with the next set of FAQ updates the same will be clear for the CCB.
NecronLord3 wrote: Then chariots cannot die, as there are no rules for allocating wounds to them.
You allocate wounds after you allocate hits. (Page 32-34 BRB) The Player controlling the Chariot decides which hit pools hit what. (Page 86 BRB) "Para phrased"
After wounds are allocated you may LOS if you are allowed by the LOS rule.
The Chariot is a unique Vehicle with a Duel profile (Page 86 BRB)
The Overlord is a Character (Necron Codex Page 89)
The Catacomb Command Barge is a Vehicle: Chariot. (Necron FAQ)
The Character rule grants LOS. (Page 100 BRB)
The LOS Rule has an exception regarding Vehicle Characters (Page 100 BRB)
The Chariot is both a Character and a Vehicle due to its duel profiles being treated as one model. Thus it is restricted by the LOS rule from being able to take a LOS roll in the first place.
Unless as it seems you are trying to say that the CCB and Overlord are not one model?
NecronLord3 wrote: Then chariots cannot die, as there are no rules for allocating wounds to them.
Yup, that's a legitimate hole in the rules. It's easy enough to patch that hole with common sense and proceed along with the game, but it is indeed a hole.
So GW was sloppy in some way. Either they didn't realize they were giving the CCBIC or they intended to give it IC but didn't realize the attending consequences for wound allocation when the CCB joins a unit.
col_impact wrote: Yup, that's a legitimate hole in the rules. It's easy enough to patch that hole with common sense and proceed along with the game, but it is indeed a hole.
So GW was sloppy in some way. Either they didn't realize they were giving the CCBIC or they intended to give it IC but didn't realize the attending consequences for wound allocation.
IC or no IC The LOS rule would not apply to a Chariot model in the first place, as they are all Vehicle Characters.
col_impact wrote: With Chariots we are told explicitly that we are dealing with one model. So a wound is allocated to the Chariot and LOS can be taken.And LOS applies to the model. So what is the model and unit type of the Chariot?
it is a dual profile unit, one of which is a vehicle, the other a non vehicle. As the controlling player I choose which profile to allocate hits to.
Page 100 also explicitly states that LoS applies to non-vehicle characters. It never factors in unit or model type. Is the rider of a CCB infantry, no. Is he a non-vehicle character? Very specifically, yes.
This is wrong. The rules and restrictions of both profiles on the model must be taken into account. This has been the entire reason this thread has been going on so long.
The Overlord part of the profile has IC which means it is normally entitled to a LOS.
The CCB part of the profile is a vehicle which is not entitled to a LOS.
We are instructed to treat these two profiles as one model, thus we have a IC that is also a Vehicle.
The Overlord with a CCB upgrade is a Vehicle Character and thus is not entitled to a LOS due to the restriction given in the LOS rule set.
we also have very specific language in allocating hits to the profiles separately and each can be wounded or take hull points separately. Otherwise you would be putting wounds on vehicles which have none, or hull points on non-vehicles which they also don't have. You want to take basic rules and apply them in a usual way to an unusual unit. You can't. Allocation of hits and wounds a separate from the single model rule.
col_impact wrote: With Chariots we are told explicitly that we are dealing with one model. So a wound is allocated to the Chariot and LOS can be taken.And LOS applies to the model. So what is the model and unit type of the Chariot?
it is a dual profile unit, one of which is a vehicle, the other a non vehicle. As the controlling player I choose which profile to allocate hits to.
Page 100 also explicitly states that LoS applies to non-vehicle characters. It never factors in unit or model type. Is the rider of a CCB infantry, no. Is he a non-vehicle character? Very specifically, yes.
This is wrong. The rules and restrictions of both profiles on the model must be taken into account. This has been the entire reason this thread has been going on so long.
The Overlord part of the profile has IC which means it is normally entitled to a LOS.
The CCB part of the profile is a vehicle which is not entitled to a LOS.
We are instructed to treat these two profiles as one model, thus we have a IC that is also a Vehicle.
The Overlord with a CCB upgrade is a Vehicle Character and thus is not entitled to a LOS due to the restriction given in the LOS rule set.
we also have very specific language in allocating hits to the profiles separately and each can be wounded or take hull points separately. Otherwise you would be putting wounds on vehicles which have none, or hull points on non-vehicles which they also don't have. You want to take basic rules and apply them in a usual way to an unusual unit. You can't. Allocation of hits and wounds a separate from the single model rule.
Can the Overlord with a CCB upgrade ever be separated from the CCB? Can the CCB ever be separated from a Purchasing Overlord? The answer to both of these questions is no.
So what is the unit type of the Riding Overlord? Is it Infantry: Character? or something else. Regardless of whether or not a Overlord retains the ICUSR when upgraded with a CCB, the question is what is the Necron Overlord's unit type?
I argue; That when a Overlord purchases a CCB and becomes the "Rider", he takes on the unit type of the CCB which is Vehicle Chariot. If the Overlord could disembark or ever be separated from the CCB then the argument could be made that the Overlord retained its unit type (As it did in 6th ed). However, (Page 86 BRB) "The Rider cannot disembark- and if one profile loses its last wound or Hull Point then the model is complete removed from play" (Para Phrased), proves that it is considered one model and not two.
Further more, it has be established that other IC's cannot join a Chariot due to it being a Vehicle, if your argument were to be true regarding the Overlord retaining it's Infantry Character unit type, then I could join a Destroyer Lord to my Overlord and not the CCB, even though the Overlord was riding the CCB and place them in a unit of wraiths.
If you cannot join another IC to a Chariot being ridden by a character because it is considered a Vehicle, Why then would one expect to able to LOS a Rider on a Chariot.
If a Chariot is considered a Unit type vehicle for one rule but a non-vehicle for another rule all while being one model then the Chariot rule set is broken.
If on the other Hand the Chariot is consider a Vehicle at all times that shares the Rules and Restrictions or its duel Profiles, then the Chariot rule set is not broken.
Edited: The Chariot is one model that has both the Character and Vehicle rule sets in its overall combined profile, to ignore one rule set or sets of rules on a model is game breaking.
BLADERIKER wrote: You allocate wounds after you allocate hits. (Page 32-34Â BRB) The Player controlling the Chariot decides which hit pools hit what. (Page 86Â BRB) "Para phrased"Â
Every time FlingitNow plays a game he automatically wins (BrB page 1 paraphrased).
Look I can do it too.
Why do you persist in making this factually incorrect statement? Why are you intentionally misleading people on what the rules say? Why are you making claims that you know are entirely false?
You can not assign hits to the Rider or Chariot when attached to a unit. This is only for shooting at Chariot units which the CCB attached to another unit is not. So please stop claiming tjis to be true when you know it is not. Intentionally telling people things you know are true really hinders resolution of the discussion and gets frustrating for those that have to repeatedly point out when you intentionally mislead people.
Chill man. He's not intentionally misleading or anything. He is just advancing his opinion. If his opinion or interpretation doesn't match yours, you don't have to get upset or frustrated.
Worry not, the rules lawyers will just point out that the IC does not join the CCB, instead he will join the wraiths unit that also includes the CCB. Therefore everything is just fine..
milkboy wrote: Chill man. He's not intentionally misleading or anything. He is just advancing his opinion. If his opinion or interpretation doesn't match yours, you don't have to get upset or frustrated.
He doesn't disagree though he's stated the CCB+unit isn't a Chariot unit. So he knows the CCB+unit is not eligible to use the hit allocation rule as I've pointed this out to him and he's never tried to argue against it.
So he knows 100% what he is claiming is false and therefore misleading to anyone that does not know this. So he is definitely deliberately misleading people.
Naw wrote: Worry not, the rules lawyers will just point out that the IC does not join the CCB, instead he will join the wraiths unit that also includes the CCB. Therefore everything is just fine..
Still waiting on your rules quotes, do you have access again?
From memory you need to prove that units join ICs, not ICs joining units, and that there is a restriction on a vehicle IC joining a non-vehicle unit. Found anything?
3) The CCB Lord cannot be in a unit with another IC
Because of points 2 and 3 the CCB Lord is not overpowered when he joins units and is in fact very self-limiting (loses mobility) and balanced.
However, following RAW opens up a hole in the rules where wound allocation in heterogenous units does not provide for vehicles (which fuels a RAI argument against allowing CCB Lord to join a unit). Commonsense could patch the hole and people could simply execute a commonsensical procedure to resolve wound allocation but nonetheless some tightening act would need to be done by GW or a TO to reconcile the rules conflict (ie FAQIC from the CCB Lord or FAQ some procedure for allocating wounds in units composed of vehicles characters and infantry).
Since there does not seem to be a balance issue if the CCB Lord is allowed to join units then a TO could go either way on the issue. If there is some balance issue that I am missing I would love to see it.
3) The CCB Lord cannot be in a unit with another IC
Because of points 2 and 3 the CCB Lord is not overpowered when he joins units and is in fact very self-limiting (loses mobility) and balanced.
However, following RAW opens up a hole in the rules where wound allocation in heterogenous units does not provide for vehicles (which fuels a RAI argument against allowing CCB Lord to join a unit). Commonsense could patch the hole but nonetheless some tightening act would need to be done by GW or a TO to reconcile the rules conflict (ie FAQIC from the CCB Lord or FAQ some procedure for allocating wounds in units composed of vehicles characters and infantry).
Since there does not seem to be a balance issue if the CCB Lord is allowed to join units then a TO could go either way on the issue. If there is some balance issue that I am missing I would love to see it.
That seems to effectively sum it up. Though I do find it rich that the commonsense approach is ignored when reading the RaW to allow the CCB to join a unit yet is expected to be used to clear up tge hole in the rules caused by this clearly unintended situation...
3) The CCB Lord cannot be in a unit with another IC
Because of points 2 and 3 the CCB Lord is not overpowered when he joins units and is in fact very self-limiting (loses mobility) and balanced.
However, following RAW opens up a hole in the rules where wound allocation in heterogenous units does not provide for vehicles (which fuels a RAI argument against allowing CCB Lord to join a unit). Commonsense could patch the hole but nonetheless some tightening act would need to be done by GW or a TO to reconcile the rules conflict (ie FAQIC from the CCB Lord or FAQ some procedure for allocating wounds in units composed of vehicles characters and infantry).
Since there does not seem to be a balance issue if the CCB Lord is allowed to join units then a TO could go either way on the issue. If there is some balance issue that I am missing I would love to see it.
That seems to effectively sum it up. Though I do find it rich that the commonsense approach is ignored when reading the RaW to allow the CCB to join a unit yet is expected to be used to clear up tge hole in the rules caused by this clearly unintended situation...
What commonsense approach am I ignoring by reading the RAW to allow the CCB to join a unit (that would not slip into the domain of a RAI argument)?
What commonsense approach am I ignoring by reading the RAW to allow the CCB to join a unit (that would not slip into the domain of aRAI argument)?
Nice caveat the problem is you're ignoring that very caveat when asking for your commonsense solution to firing at the mixed unit.
3) The CCB Lord cannot be in a unit with another IC
Because of points 2 and 3 the CCB Lord is not overpowered when he joins units and is in fact very self-limiting (loses mobility) and balanced.
However, following RAW opens up a hole in the rules where wound allocation in heterogenous units does not provide for vehicles (which fuels a RAI argument against allowing CCB Lord to join a unit). Commonsense could patch the hole but nonetheless some tightening act would need to be done by GW or a TO to reconcile the rules conflict (ie FAQIC from the CCB Lord or FAQ some procedure for allocating wounds in units composed of vehicles characters and infantry).
Since there does not seem to be a balance issue if the CCB Lord is allowed to join units then a TO could go either way on the issue. If there is some balance issue that I am missing I would love to see it.
That seems to effectively sum it up. Though I do find it rich that the commonsense approach is ignored when reading the RaW to allow the CCB to join a unit yet is expected to be used to clear up tge hole in the rules caused by this clearly unintended situation...
What commonsense approach am I ignoring by reading the RAW to allow the CCB to join a unit (that would not slip into the domain of a RAI argument)?
We are told they cannot "disembark", when strongly implies they are "embarked". How does and IC that cannot disembark from a vehicle able to join another squad?
How does the USRIC on one part of the unit transfer to the other part. Not its not a Model special rule, its unit based. Only one part of that two part unit has the IC special rule, how is it being transferred as its a nontransferable USR.
We have FAQs for Daemons which establishes precendent on how to hand the matter which involves losing the ICUSR.
Essentially joining a CCB to a unit breaks the game. Not from a balance point of view but from a rules point of view as we don't have a way to deal with mixed units of vehicles and non-vehicles.
Naw wrote: Worry not, the rules lawyers will just point out that the IC does not join the CCB, instead he will join the wraiths unit that also includes the CCB. Therefore everything is just fine..
Still waiting on your rules quotes, do you have access again?
They can be found under rules for IC's.
From memory you need to prove that units join ICs, not ICs joining units, and that there is a restriction on a vehicle IC joining a non-vehicle unit. Found anything?
Like I said, forum rules lawyers will try to apply their faulty logic here, thanks for proving my point.
Do read a couple of posts after yours to get the correct idea.
broo wrote: If anyone uses this nonsense in a game with me I will throw the "single model" across the room.. that is all.
Careful. You might be hauled up for damage to other persons property. I believe the gentlemanly method would be to end the game, if you really cannot play on with this, by conceding OR soldier on and try to win it anyway.
Violence is the last refuge of the incompetent. And this is a quote. Salvor Hardin I believe.
Naw wrote: Worry not, the rules lawyers will just point out that the IC does not join the CCB, instead he will join the wraiths unit that also includes the CCB. Therefore everything is just fine..
Still waiting on your rules quotes, do you have access again?
They can be found under rules for IC's.
Nope, that's not a rules quote , or even citation. You have, as ever, utterly failed to prove your case. Retract it.
Prove your claim, following the tenets, or refrain from posting something that appears to be a real argument, to avoid others fruitlessly trying to argue against your rule less, disproved opinion.
naw wrote:
From memory you need to prove that units join ICs, not ICs joining units, and that there is a restriction on a vehicle IC joining a non-vehicle unit. Found anything?
Like I said, forum rules lawyers will try to apply their faulty logic here, thanks for proving my point.
Do read a couple of posts after yours to get the correct idea.
THEN PROVE IT. Don't make baseless, lying claims - the logic isn't faulty, and you've not even made a minuscule effort to prove a damn thing so please, PROVE something. Or, refrain from lying.
The logic is sound. You have lied. Don't.
The correct RULES BASED answer is: a vehicle IC CAN join a non-vehicle, non-mc containing unit. This is established using the rules on p166 which give general permission to join, provide no restrictions on vehicle ICs specifically, and therefore the case is proven.
BLADERIKER wrote: You allocate wounds after you allocate hits. (Page 32-34Â BRB) The Player controlling the Chariot decides which hit pools hit what. (Page 86Â BRB) "Para phrased"Â
Every time FlingitNow plays a game he automatically wins (BrB page 1 paraphrased).
Look I can do it too.
Why do you persist in making this factually incorrect statement? Why are you intentionally misleading people on what the rules say? Why are you making claims that you know are entirely false?
You can not assign hits to the Rider or Chariot when attached to a unit. This is only for shooting at Chariot units which the CCB attached to another unit is not. So please stop claiming tjis to be true when you know it is not. Intentionally telling people things you know are true really hinders resolution of the discussion and gets frustrating for those that have to repeatedly point out when you intentionally mislead people.
Very well then As it has been stated and restated many times before so shall I again state it. My attempt at para phrasing was to shorten the length of the quote without changing its context..
This time without Para-Phrasing.
Page 30 (32-34 for better explanation of page 30) BRB: "The Shooting Sequence:
1. Nominate Unit to Shoot. Choose one of your units that is able to shoot but has yet to do so this turn.
2. Choose a target. The unit can shoot at an enemy unit that it can see.
3. Select a Weapon. Select a weapon the firing unit is equipped with. All models equipped with a weapon with the same name can now shoot that weapon at the target. Every model that wishes to shoot must be within range of at least one visible model in the target unit. Models that cannot see the target, or are not in range, cannot shoot.
4. Roll To Hit. Roll a D6 for each shot fired. A Models Ballistic Skill determines what it must roll in order to hit the target.
5. Roll To Wound. For each shot that hit, roll again to see if it wounds the target. The result needed is determined by comparing the Strength of the firing weapon with the majority Toughness of the target unit.
6. Allocate Wounds & Remove Casualties. Any Wounds caused by the firing unit must now be allocated, one at a time, to the closest model in the target unit. A Model with a Wound allocated to it can take a saving throw (If it has one) to avoid being wounded. If a model is reduced to 0 Wounds, it is removed as a casualty. Wounds are then allocated to the next closest model. Continue to allocate Wounds and take saving throws until all Wounds have been resolved.
7. Select Another Weapon. After resolving all shots from the currently selected weapon, if the firing unit is equipped with differently named weapons that have yet to fire, select another weapon and repeat steps 3 to 6."
And that is the shooting Sequence.
As per Page 86 BRB: "Shooting at Chariots: When shooting at a Chariot unit total up the number of successful hits that have been caused. Keep the dice that have scored hit and create a 'pool', where each dice represents a hit." (Bold Text only)
As per Page 86 BRB: "Shooting at Chariots: The player controlling the Chariot unit then allocates each hit pool either to the rider or the chariot of the closest model in the unit." (Bold Text Only)
Now let us take into account that the Chariot Rules are more specific than the Shooting Sequence rules and thus over ride the normal Shooting Sequence.
The Chariot rules break the Shooting Sequence after step 4 but before Step 5.
You have gone out of your way to state that an Overlord with CCB upgrade attached to another unit is not a Chariot unit. To this I do not disagree. And unlike you I will show why you are correct in this statement.
Page 9 BRB. "Forming a unit: A unit usually consists of several models that have banded together, but a single, powerful model, such as a lone character, a tank, a war engine of rampaging monster, is also considered to be a unit in its own right."
Page 166 BRB. "Independent Characters: While an Independent Character is part of a unit, he counts as part of unit for all rules purposes, though he still follows the rules for Characters."
There is one issue that you keep bringing up, which is how to resolve hitting and wounding a Overlord with CCB upgrade in a Unit.
Page 34 BRB. "Allocating wounds: First allocate a Wound from the Wound pool to the enemy model closest to the firing unit, regardless of which model caused that Wound."
And that is where you are stuck right there.
As the Overlord upgraded with CCB is also a Vehicle it may well help us to look at how to shoot at Vehicles.
Page 74 BRB. "Shooting at Vehicles: If the target vehicle is in range, roll to hit as normal. If hits are scored, roll each to see if they penetrate the vehicles Armour Value."
I do not believe I need to go into Glancing and Penetrating hit and the Vehicle Damage chart, or do I...
So then we have a Overlord with CCB upgrade attached to a Unit of 6 wraiths. (Why not)
Scenario 1: Space Wolf Drop Pod with 10 Wolfguard equiped with double Combi-Melta on each model drop in so that the wraiths are the closest models in the Overlords unit.
Space Wolf player declares Overlords unit as target for Wolfguard.
There are 4 wraiths in the unit that are closer than the Overlord/CCB model. Here is how I would recommend handling this situation.
Because the Chariot model allows its controller to allocate hits directed at the chariot only and there is a chance that each of the four wraiths will be instant Death-ed by the Combi-meltas, the shooting player Fires all the combi-meltas at one time. Then rolls to wound four at a time .If any of the wraiths fail their 3+ invul then the number of wounds rolled for the next pool is reduced to the number of remaining wraiths before the Overlord/CCB is the target. (yes this is time consuming I know) Once all four wraiths are dead then the remain Combi-Meltas hits can be resolved as per the chariot rule. Still wounding against majority Toughness if the Overlord profile is selected for wound allocation.
Scenario 2: 3 Broadside Battle Suits with High Yield Missile Pods, and Smart Missile systems, and 6 Missile Drones are firing at the Overlord with CCB upgrade and attached Wraiths.
The Overlord is the closest model to the Broadside unit and there are 6 marker lights on the Overlord's unit.
The Broadsides and Drones hit with everything, nothing misses. There are 12 Str 7 ap4 hits (HYMP), 12 Str 7 ap 4 Hits (MD), and 12 Str 5 ap 5 hits(SMS). All of which must hit the closest model which is the Overlord. As per the Shooting at Chariots rules set the controlling player allocates the 12 (SMS) hits against the CCB to no effect. Then Allocates the 12 HYMP hits to the rider (Which Wound against Majority Toughness, in this case T4 because of the wraiths) Wounding on 2+. The Overlord rolls his saving throws of a 2+ and fails 2 (Statistically average) he then allocates the 12 (MP) hits to the chariot which will need a 6 to glance and takes 2 glances (Statistically average) Thus leaving the Overlord profile at 1 wound and the CCB profile at one Hull Point.
The Overlord is Prohibited from Taking LOS due to him being a Vehicle and a Character. I have covered this already in another post in this thread.
Can this take longer to resolve a shooting phase against an Overlord with CCB upgrade and attached to a unit? Yes it could. Does it break the game? No it does not.
To throw an answer to the "Why did Daemons lose their IC and not the Necron Overlord" I think we need to look at how the Chariot Rules for Fantasy work and what restrictions are placed upon the Chariot unit under that rule set. Note; There is one and only one fantasy Army that can attach Chariots to units, The Tomb Kings. Games Work Shop is in the business of selling models, and what better way to get a Cross over from one GW game system to another than to make the Rule sets extremely similar. Just my two cents.
So much longer than when I expected other people to go and read the rules in their rule book themselves...
Naw wrote: Worry not, the rules lawyers will just point out that the IC does not join the CCB, instead he will join the wraiths unit that also includes the CCB. Therefore everything is just fine..
Still waiting on your rules quotes, do you have access again?
They can be found under rules for IC's..
That's not a quote.
Please note that just saying 'it's in the rules' is not sufficient for the purposes of discussion here. You need to back up a rules claim with actual rules.
BLADERIKER wrote: Can this take longer to resolve a shooting phase against an Overlord with CCB upgrade and attached to a unit? Yes it could. Does it break the game? No it does not.Â
Yes it could work however as you yourself have proven this is not how the rules work this is your proposed Houserule and breaks the Chariot rules (you can only do hit allocation when firing at a Chariot unit).
That was the issue your paraphrasing completely changed the context of the rule from on that was not eligible to be used to one that was. It is exactly the same as me claiming my Boltguns add 2 to the damage table results due to this quote BrB page 76 "add a +2 modifier to the roll on the Vehicle Damage table". I'll just blow up your CCB with boltguns hits because BrB page 75 "hit, you must roll on the Vehicle Damage table"
See how using rules in situations that you have no permission to gets real stupid real quick?
If a CCB joins a unit of infantry, then it's not a Chariot unit... it's a unit of infantry, there for the shooting at a chariot unit rules do not apply. Thus there is no way to resolve shooting.
Well there is, until you get to the chariot. So, a simple houserule would let the game continue, or you houserule it away that a CCB cannot join the unit.
Naw wrote: Worry not, the rules lawyers will just point out that the IC does not join the CCB, instead he will join the wraiths unit that also includes the CCB. Therefore everything is just fine..
Still waiting on your rules quotes, do you have access again?
They can be found under rules for IC's..
That's not a quote.
Please note that just saying 'it's in the rules' is not sufficient for the purposes of discussion here. You need to back up a rules claim with actual rules.
That has been done often enough with actual quotes and the position was fully explained to him.
I was done with this until he claimed that CCBIC has a permission to join any unit, including other IC. His reasoning was that it was not the IC joining.
BLADERIKER wrote: You allocate wounds after you allocate hits. (Page 32-34Â BRB) The Player controlling the Chariot decides which hit pools hit what. (Page 86Â BRB) "Para phrased"Â
Every time FlingitNow plays a game he automatically wins (BrB page 1 paraphrased).
Look I can do it too.
Why do you persist in making this factually incorrect statement? Why are you intentionally misleading people on what the rules say? Why are you making claims that you know are entirely false?
You can not assign hits to the Rider or Chariot when attached to a unit. This is only for shooting at Chariot units which the CCB attached to another unit is not. So please stop claiming tjis to be true when you know it is not. Intentionally telling people things you know are true really hinders resolution of the discussion and gets frustrating for those that have to repeatedly point out when you intentionally mislead people.
Very well then As it has been stated and restated many times before so shall I again state it. My attempt at para phrasing was to shorten the length of the quote without changing its context..
This time without Para-Phrasing.
Page 30 (32-34 for better explanation of page 30) BRB: "The Shooting Sequence:
1. Nominate Unit to Shoot. Choose one of your units that is able to shoot but has yet to do so this turn.
2. Choose a target. The unit can shoot at an enemy unit that it can see.
3. Select a Weapon. Select a weapon the firing unit is equipped with. All models equipped with a weapon with the same name can now shoot that weapon at the target. Every model that wishes to shoot must be within range of at least one visible model in the target unit. Models that cannot see the target, or are not in range, cannot shoot.
4. Roll To Hit. Roll a D6 for each shot fired. A Models Ballistic Skill determines what it must roll in order to hit the target.
5. Roll To Wound. For each shot that hit, roll again to see if it wounds the target. The result needed is determined by comparing the Strength of the firing weapon with the majority Toughness of the target unit.
6. Allocate Wounds & Remove Casualties. Any Wounds caused by the firing unit must now be allocated, one at a time, to the closest model in the target unit. A Model with a Wound allocated to it can take a saving throw (If it has one) to avoid being wounded. If a model is reduced to 0 Wounds, it is removed as a casualty. Wounds are then allocated to the next closest model. Continue to allocate Wounds and take saving throws until all Wounds have been resolved.
7. Select Another Weapon. After resolving all shots from the currently selected weapon, if the firing unit is equipped with differently named weapons that have yet to fire, select another weapon and repeat steps 3 to 6."
And that is the shooting Sequence.
As per Page 86 BRB: "Shooting at Chariots: When shooting at a Chariot unit total up the number of successful hits that have been caused. Keep the dice that have scored hit and create a 'pool', where each dice represents a hit." (Bold Text only)
As per Page 86 BRB: "Shooting at Chariots: The player controlling the Chariot unit then allocates each hit pool either to the rider or the chariot of the closest model in the unit." (Bold Text Only)
Now let us take into account that the Chariot Rules are more specific than the Shooting Sequence rules and thus over ride the normal Shooting Sequence.
The Chariot rules break the Shooting Sequence after step 4 but before Step 5.
You have gone out of your way to state that an Overlord with CCB upgrade attached to another unit is not a Chariot unit. To this I do not disagree. And unlike you I will show why you are correct in this statement.
Page 9 BRB. "Forming a unit: A unit usually consists of several models that have banded together, but a single, powerful model, such as a lone character, a tank, a war engine of rampaging monster, is also considered to be a unit in its own right."
Page 166 BRB. "Independent Characters: While an Independent Character is part of a unit, he counts as part of unit for all rules purposes, though he still follows the rules for Characters."
There is one issue that you keep bringing up, which is how to resolve hitting and wounding a Overlord with CCB upgrade in a Unit.
Page 34 BRB. "Allocating wounds: First allocate a Wound from the Wound pool to the enemy model closest to the firing unit, regardless of which model caused that Wound."
And that is where you are stuck right there.
As the Overlord upgraded with CCB is also a Vehicle it may well help us to look at how to shoot at Vehicles.
Page 74 BRB. "Shooting at Vehicles: If the target vehicle is in range, roll to hit as normal. If hits are scored, roll each to see if they penetrate the vehicles Armour Value."
I do not believe I need to go into Glancing and Penetrating hit and the Vehicle Damage chart, or do I...
So then we have a Overlord with CCB upgrade attached to a Unit of 6 wraiths. (Why not)
Scenario 1: Space Wolf Drop Pod with 10 Wolfguard equiped with double Combi-Melta on each model drop in so that the wraiths are the closest models in the Overlords unit.
Space Wolf player declares Overlords unit as target for Wolfguard.
There are 4 wraiths in the unit that are closer than the Overlord/CCB model. Here is how I would recommend handling this situation.
Because the Chariot model allows its controller to allocate hits directed at the chariot only and there is a chance that each of the four wraiths will be instant Death-ed by the Combi-meltas, the shooting player Fires all the combi-meltas at one time. Then rolls to wound four at a time .If any of the wraiths fail their 3+ invul then the number of wounds rolled for the next pool is reduced to the number of remaining wraiths before the Overlord/CCB is the target. (yes this is time consuming I know) Once all four wraiths are dead then the remain Combi-Meltas hits can be resolved as per the chariot rule. Still wounding against majority Toughness if the Overlord profile is selected for wound allocation.
Scenario 2: 3 Broadside Battle Suits with High Yield Missile Pods, and Smart Missile systems, and 6 Missile Drones are firing at the Overlord with CCB upgrade and attached Wraiths.
The Overlord is the closest model to the Broadside unit and there are 6 marker lights on the Overlord's unit.
The Broadsides and Drones hit with everything, nothing misses. There are 12 Str 7 ap4 hits (HYMP), 12 Str 7 ap 4 Hits (MD), and 12 Str 5 ap 5 hits(SMS). All of which must hit the closest model which is the Overlord. As per the Shooting at Chariots rules set the controlling player allocates the 12 (SMS) hits against the CCB to no effect. Then Allocates the 12 HYMP hits to the rider (Which Wound against Majority Toughness, in this case T4 because of the wraiths) Wounding on 2+. The Overlord rolls his saving throws of a 2+ and fails 2 (Statistically average) he then allocates the 12 (MP) hits to the chariot which will need a 6 to glance and takes 2 glances (Statistically average) Thus leaving the Overlord profile at 1 wound and the CCB profile at one Hull Point.
The Overlord is Prohibited from Taking LOS due to him being a Vehicle and a Character. I have covered this already in another post in this thread.
Can this take longer to resolve a shooting phase against an Overlord with CCB upgrade and attached to a unit? Yes it could. Does it break the game? No it does not.
To throw an answer to the "Why did Daemons lose their IC and not the Necron Overlord" I think we need to look at how the Chariot Rules for Fantasy work and what restrictions are placed upon the Chariot unit under that rule set. Note; There is one and only one fantasy Army that can attach Chariots to units, The Tomb Kings. Games Work Shop is in the business of selling models, and what better way to get a Cross over from one GW game system to another than to make the Rule sets extremely similar. Just my two cents.
So much longer than when I expected other people to go and read the rules in their rule book themselves...
That works fine, now do that same scenario with the Chariot the 6th model in from the front.
Naw wrote: Worry not, the rules lawyers will just point out that the IC does not join the CCB, instead he will join the wraiths unit that also includes the CCB. Therefore everything is just fine..
Still waiting on your rules quotes, do you have access again?
They can be found under rules for IC's..
That's not a quote.
Please note that just saying 'it's in the rules' is not sufficient for the purposes of discussion here. You need to back up a rules claim with actual rules.
That has been done often enough with actual quotes and the position was fully explained to him.
I was done with this until he claimed that CCBIC has a permission to join any unit, including other IC. His reasoning was that it was not the IC joining.
Anyway, I'm done with his game now.
Actually that is another lie. You have yet to provide a single rules quote that backs up your assertions (that a vehicle IC is prohibited from joining any non-vehicle, non-MC containing unit, the units join ICs) in any way, shape or form.
My "reasoning" is "because the rules state who joins whom". Your reasoning? You have yet to provide any. No rules quotes, no argument from facts. Just repeated assertions, accusations of faulty logic, and lots of handwaving away requirements to cite rules for various spurious reasons. No actual rules, though. Youve even done it here, after a mod pointed out your failings.
I have learnt my lesson though - arguing is impossible when the other side refuses to cite relevant rules, and creates concepts out of thin air.
Thing about most the arguments here is the cherry picking of rules quotes, or the complete misreading of the rules.
The chariot and rider when shot at have the rule that the controlling player gets to put all the hits of the same time into pools. Ie. A mixed units gun all fire then hit pools of all the different guns are pooled up. , hell better yet just re-read the shooting at chariots section.
Also you will note you cannot look out sir the wounds from either to the imaginary unit you joined. There is no permission to do this not a mechanic spelled out. A chariot has its own rules now for the chariot and the rider.
For the crowd that says the IC's special rules transfer over to the chariot they don't. In the independant character rules sections it states they don't unless the usr specifically states it does and cites and example of the usr stubborn. Nor the chariots back to the rider. Its a vehicle , never ceases to be a vehicle ever riderless or not. Vehicles cannot join units and vice versa. I'm sure that rule is some where's in the seventh edition rule book.
Lungpickle wrote: Thing about most the arguments here is the cherry picking of rules quotes, or the complete misreading of the rules.
The chariot and rider when shot at have the rule that the controlling player gets to put all the hits of the same time into pools. Ie. A mixed units gun all fire then hit pools of all the different guns are pooled up. , hell better yet just re-read the shooting at chariots section.
You say cherry pick rules quotes and complete misreading, yet you are doing that here. That rule does not belong to the Chariot and Rider is it a rule is ONLY activated when someone is shooting a Chariot unit. It is therefore not usable when shooting at a mixed unit containing a Chariot.
Also you will note you cannot look out sir the wounds from either to the imaginary unit you joined. There is no permission to do this not a mechanic spelled out. A chariot has its own rules now for the chariot and the rider.
On this everyone agrees.
For the crowd that says the IC's special rules transfer over to the chariot they don't. In the independant character rules sections it states they don't unless the usr specifically states it does and cites and example of the usr stubborn. Nor the chariots back to the rider. Its a vehicle , never ceases to be a vehicle ever riderless or not. Vehicles cannot join units and vice versa. I'm sure that rule is some where's in the seventh edition rule book.
Done
Not content with cherry picking parts of rules to use you then start making them up out of thin air. The IC rules state an IC can't join a Vehicle (or MC) not vice versa. So a Vehicle IC can clearly join vehicles.
nosferatu1001 wrote: Lung pickle - nope. ICs cannot join vehicles. Nothing about vehicle ICs joining non vehicle units. Really, there isn't
It is one unit, treated at all times as one model. The model has the IC rule
It's not cherry picking when your rebuttal requires making up rules and ignoring others....
Well put
As for talking about wounds and the Overlord with CCB upgrade joined to a unit.
If you have an IC in any unit and there are 5 other models that have more than one wound each (Like Wraiths) in front of the IC, when you roll to wound with a Weapon that causes ID due to Double Toughness but the IC's toughness is high enough to not be effected by the ID rule, do you roll all your wounds and then make him save against them? or do you roll the number of Possible ID wounds before it gets to the IC and then see who fails?
Example:
Necron player has Dlord w SWeave. + 6 Wraiths.
Firing Player with a Knight Paladin.
Firing player scores two direct hits with his battle Cannon hitting 14 total models (7+7=14) on the unit from a direction where 5 wraiths will take wounds before you get to the Destroyer Lord. battle Cannons are str8- Ap 3 which will ID the wraiths t4 3+ save but will not ID the DLord with t6 2+ save. So if you roll all the wounds and caused against said unit 10 wounds, and the Necron player fails 10 3+saves when does he get to make saves with his Dlords Better save of a 2+?
The answer is: you should roll the wounds for each model with the same save before you roll to wound the model with the Better save. Which means those successful hits that have not been rolled as wounds are still hits until you roll to wound.
Also "Hits caused by Blast Templates are always Resolved against the Chariot" BRB Page 86. (Just an FYI) This is the reason I am switching to Krakk Missiles and chaging the unit size in my next Example.
SM player with Land Speeder Squadron (3 Land Speeders) (3 Hvy Bolters, and 3 Typhoon Missiles Launchers)(Prescience active)
Necron Overlord w Sempweave, and CCB upgrades(Not jinking) attached to 3 Wraiths.
Sm player is firing his Krakk Missiles (Str 8 ap3) at the Necron Unit. 6 Shots, 5 hits after re-rolls. There is one wraith before the Overlord/CCB is the nearest model. Because the Overlord has a Better save (2+) than the Wraiths (3+) and a Higher Toughness (T5) the Wraiths (T4) each would which could cause ID against the Wraiths will have to rolled one at a time until either the hit and wound pools are empty or the Overlord is the nearest Model. When the Overlord becomes the nearest model those remain hits that have not been rolled into wounds can be allocated to either the Overlord or the CCB as per the Chariot Rule set (Page 86. BRB) and then resolved against Armour value or Toughness depending on which profiles was chosen by the Necron Player.
This above scenario is why one Should roll wounds for like saves against mixed save units, and then roll wounds and or Armour Pen in this case against the other saves. in the unit.
This is How I have played it in the past due to trying to be a good sport with my fellow Hobbyist.
BLADERIKER wrote: Firing player scores two direct hits with his battle Cannon hitting 14 total models (7+7=14) on the unit from a direction where 5 wraiths will take wounds before you get to the Destroyer Lord. battle Cannons are str8- Ap 3 which will ID the wraiths t4 3+ save but will not ID the DLord with t6 2+ save. So if you roll all the wounds and caused against said unit 10 wounds, and the Necron player fails 10 3+saves when does he get to make saves with his Dlords Better save of a 2+?Â
The answer is: you should roll the wounds for each model with the same save before you roll to wound the model with the Better save. Which means those successful hits that have not been rolled as wounds are still hits until you roll to wound.Â
Oh dear, just oh dear. Have you read the shooting phase rules? You roll all wounds then take saves 1 at a time. You can use fast dice rolling 5 saves first then rolling less saves at a time depending on how many surviving Wraiths are between the Knight and the D Lord.
BLADERIKER wrote: Firing player scores two direct hits with his battle Cannon hitting 14 total models (7+7=14) on the unit from a direction where 5 wraiths will take wounds before you get to the Destroyer Lord. battle Cannons are str8- Ap 3 which will ID the wraiths t4 3+ save but will not ID the DLord with t6 2+ save. So if you roll all the wounds and caused against said unit 10 wounds, and the Necron player fails 10 3+saves when does he get to make saves with his Dlords Better save of a 2+?Â
The answer is: you should roll the wounds for each model with the same save before you roll to wound the model with the Better save. Which means those successful hits that have not been rolled as wounds are still hits until you roll to wound.Â
Oh dear, just oh dear. Have you read the shooting phase rules? You roll all wounds then take saves 1 at a time. You can use fast dice rolling 5 saves first then rolling less saves at a time depending on how many surviving Wraiths are between the Knight and the D Lord.
To the best of my knowledge; Never before in WH40K has there been a single model with duel profiles (Which are both active at the same time) where the player controlling that model gets to choose which profile gets hit by which shooting attacks, and have said shooting attacks be resolved against said profile. Also to the Best of my Knowledge: There has never been a Vehicle with the IC rule until now. (Whether it is a mistake on the part of GW or a Deliberate action taken for this new edition we cannot know as yet)
Because the Chariot rules regarding how to shoot at a Chariot (BRB Page 86) are more specific than the normal Shooting rules there must be some concession made about how to deal with it. Hence my attempts to reconcile these issue until either GW does,(one way or the other) or those that do not wish to play against it (Like those that would not play against a knight when Codex Imperial Knights was released because they said knights were Op, only to find they were not as OP as they thought) simply lose out on playing.
From what I have seen there is nothing broken about the Overlord with the CCB upgrade , being attached to legal unit type.
You still wound the unit it is in at majority Toughness.
It is restricted to only move as fast as the unit it is attached to.
It cannot take LOS rolls.
If the CCB suffers an Explode result then the attached unit will likely take the brunt of it.
The issue is how to Resolve wounds against it when the controlling player has not chosen where to allocate the hits that caused those wounds.
So my option is to allocate hits as normal to those models that are nearer to the shooter than the Overlord/CCB, and then separate those hits into pools equal to the number of models that are nearer to the shooter than the Overlord/CCB, then roll to wound those models that are closer, until either all of those models fail their saves and are removed or the hit pools empty. Then should the Overlord CCB be the nearest model the controlling player then determines which profile is going to take which set of hits. Resolve those hits that could ID/Explode the Overlord/CCB and resolve them one at a time, and should it Die/Explode then take those remaining hit pools and resolve them as normal against the remain part of the unit.
Complicated? A little. Without Clear Guidance from GW on this matter, we either ignore or attempt to destroy this new and interesting option, or we embrace it.
Been reading the whole thing and skipping around a little bit but..... wouldn't you just allocate the wounds to the rider since that is the profile that can take wounds on this"one model"? Or has this notion come up but debunked or refuted?
Oberron wrote: Been reading the whole thing and skipping around a little bit but..... wouldn't you just allocate the wounds to the rider since that is the profile that can take wounds on this"one model"? Or has this notion come up but debunked or refuted?
I believe one of the posters have mentioned that there is no specified way in the rulebook to do so. Thus, concluding that joining is not possible, if wound allocation is not possible.
The new chariot rules mention, if the chariot unit is shot at, hit allocation first, then the owner of the chariot decides which hit goes to the rider and which hit goes to the chariot. And wounding or penetration roll is rolled. This is different from the usual wound allocation method.
Automatically Appended Next Post: My belief is that hit allocation can work for mixed units as well; you would just roll wounding and penetration accordingly.
But according to a few of the posters if the chariot joins a unit its no longer a chariot unit. Which makes since since an IC is joinging a unit and becomes part of that unit for all rules purposes (pg 166 "While an Independent Character is part of a unit, he counts as part of the unit for all rules purposes, though he still follows the rule for characters." if anyone wanted a page and para for it). And since it is no longer a chariot unit that means it just follows normal shooting procedure wouldn't it?
I might just be at a loss where people are getting at with the whole allocating wounds to the chariot profile breaks the game part.
Edit: This is just a guess and not HWIP. I'd make a call when i see it in game played against me and even then i'd just do the dice roll if there is a problem on page 10 under the Most Important Rule just to get the game on with it.
One solution proposed was to just allocate to the rider, since it is a wound. But as there is no rule specifying it, the argument is that is cannot be done at all.
The definition about a chariot unit is not specified in the chariot rules. It required players to seek another rule, to try to get an analogy of what it means. It could be meant that way, or it could be poor rule writing, as chariot rules are only just updated.
Automatically Appended Next Post: The way I see it, I find the counter argument for not joining is a little cumbersome as it relies on the fact that wound allocation is not properly specified and thus, it must mean that a chariot cannot join. This uses a secondary rule to suppress the IC rule.
If the argument was that the IC rule cannot be passed to the Overlord, this is a more direct line of argument. However, the counter argument is that the chariot has become an upgrade to the Overlord, similar to bikes, jump packs, Juggernauts etc. if the IC rule is automatically conferred to these upgrades and mounts, why should it not automatically transfer to the CCB.
Finally, if having IC required transferring to the CCB, and without transferring, the chariot character cannot join units, why was there a need to remove IC status from Daemons? Keeping it would not harm them, if the argument of transferring is accepted.
milkboy wrote: One solution proposed was to just allocate to the rider, since it is a wound. But as there is no rule specifying it, the argument is that is cannot be done at all.
The definition about a chariot unit is not specified in the chariot rules. It required players to seek another rule, to try to get an analogy of what it means. It could be meant that way, or it could be poor rule writing, as chariot rules are only just updated.
Automatically Appended Next Post: The way I see it, I find the counter argument for not joining is a little cumbersome as it relies on the fact that wound allocation is not properly specified and thus, it must mean that a chariot cannot join. This uses a secondary rule to suppress the IC rule.
If the argument was that the IC rule cannot be passed to the Overlord, this is a more direct line of argument. However, the counter argument is that the chariot has become an upgrade to the Overlord, similar to bikes, jump packs, Juggernauts etc. if the IC rule is automatically conferred to these upgrades and mounts, why should it not automatically transfer to the CCB.
Chariots and the complexity around them in this instance are not really comparable to bikes, Jump packs, etc, those change the profile of the rider, the chariot retains the profiles of the transport and the rider, they join rather than replace. The CCB profile is does not have the IC rule, GW could have easily FAQ'd that IN also. Massive difference. It's evident when reading the chariot rules they have not accounted for a situation a chariot is in a unit with other models.
A little bit of caution should be taken over the ' one model ' thing, both profiles should still be accounted for, If not not really any point in having 2 distinct profiles.
milkboy wrote: Nem, what do you think about the removal of IC from daemons? Was that a necessary change? If it was, what could it have been done to prevent?
I think it was necessary to avoid confusion, but if it necessary to stop CCB's joining other units? No, not by the rules. I would hazard a guess in later publications a model being taken as a rider will always lose some rules - ones that are not compatible with being a chariot (Like this one). At the moment we have some veeery sloppy 'fix's' between editions.
One model is very direct, not always correct. I agree much with what MarkCron was posting earlier in the thread, he quoted the relevant parts so didn't reiterate at that time. You have a Rider and a Vehicle which is one model. The Rider can join a unit, the Vehicle can not (Via not being a IC). The part about one model makes that very confusing. However, Markcron satisfied me with the quotes outlining how nether uses special rules or war gear / weapons of the other (as in, in some cases they defiantly do act like 2 models) - In other words one model probably means more about one physical model than an actual duel profile model.
As for special rules, interestingly they are given to the model for being bought with the unit. Either a chariot unit is something that doesn't actually exist, or the Overlord also does not have IC rule because the unit for the rider doesn't exist. Again they've drastically changed some rules to be none conformist, and the old rules are not written to accommodate, and the FAQ's for them are lacking.
The rebuttal is RAW should be X because a FAQ for a different army insinuates it's correct is, while plausible and should be taken into consideration, but it's as likely they mucked up on the 'Cron FAQ. That's all in RAI territory.
I disagree that it isnt one model as in 40k idea of model - it certainly is, at it talks about the exception being the two profiles. IT therefore still fulfills the criteria for a single model AND the ic rules talk about the "iC" joining the unit, which we know IS a model joining a unit. So the vehicle has "permission" as you are told the model can join, and the vehicle is the model (is the IC)
Is it the clearest thing they could have done? Absolutely not, however I am not sure it wasnt intended. They just didnt think about he consequenmces (wound allocation vs hit allocaiton, for one!)
I would like to add something I found last night under special rules that I thought applied.
Page 156 BRB Compendium of Special Rules: Last paragraph. "Unless Specifically Stated, a model cannot gain the benefit of a special rule more than once. However, the effects of multiple different special rules are cumulative."
With the Chariot Rules (on Page 86 of the BRB) stating that a Chariot model has two profiles but is always treated as one model, and the quote I gave above regarding USR's
I argue that profiles include: Stat line's, War-gear, USR's, Unit Types,(Sometimes other things).
The Overlord profile that was its own stand alone model with its own USR's and the CCB profile with it's own stand alone model and USR's are fused into one model, Which gives us an Overlord Riding a CCB, with both Profiles active and both profile's USR's affecting the new Model. This would allow the to Rider benefit from the jink USR (Which for Daemons could be better than their Invul save) and the Vehcile benefit from the riders USR's. I would also point out the when both profiles are combined into one model the different USR's are cumulative as per the USR rules set. There are multiple USR's effecting this one hybrid model.
Secondly the CCB profile does not have the ICUSR and can thus benefit from it, while the Ovelord does not have the Jink USR and can thus benefit from it. The CCB does not have the Ever-Living Special Rule unlike the Overlord but, will benefit from it should either of the two profiles reach zero wounds or zero hull points. Further more the Ever-living Special Rule will benefit from the Rez Orb War-gear rules.
I also would argue that the Overlord's Unit type changes from Infantry to Vehicle when riding on a CCB and here is why.
page 100 BRB: Characters and Moving: "Characters follow the movement rules for models of their type"
If I have an infantry Overlord on foot he moves like infantry (Character), where as if I have a Overlord upgraded with CCB he moves like Vehicle (Chariot, Fast Skimmer). If the Overlord could disembark then there would be no reason to believe the Overlords unit type changed, as he is simply being transported by the chariot and not part of the chariot model. I know there is nothing stating in the chariot rules that the rider changes its unit type but, it does state that the rider can never disembark and if one profile dies they are both removed. If I apply the rules for Characters to the Overlord with CCB, I then could make the argument the Overlord is now a vehicle as he moves like a (Vehicle: Chariot, Fast, Skimmer.)
I very much hope this is the case. I've been wanting to run 6 wraiths with trans-dimensional beamers. Allowing a phaeron overlord to join the wraith unit and keep up would be very helpful.
The overlords unit type would stay infantry - or he would be would be subject to vehicle rules (Having AV, no armor saves etc). The profile would have to remain infantry to work.
The CCB would remain a vehicle unit. The profile would remain a vehicle.
'Unit type' is not based on the actual unit, it is based on the model.
So... ?
When using them both together, they move etc like a Chariot, but still take their profiles as a separate (not both vehicles, not both infantry and not truly chariot) Changing in this way is quite unprecedented, which is causing (I am guessing) unforeseen problems.
Oh definitely causing issues. Should really have operated like fantasy, where multiple statlines on one model are common, and dont cause these issues. However AV really does mess up this system in a number of ways...
Ffyllotek wrote: I very much hope this is the case. I've been wanting to run 6 wraiths with trans-dimensional beamers. Allowing a phaeron overlord to join the wraith unit and keep up would be very helpful.
Just an option, Obyron or a Veiltek can escort a Phaeron lord to the squad, then it can fire.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
milkboy wrote: Nem, what do you think about the removal of IC from daemons? Was that a necessary change? If it was, what could it have been done to prevent?
. The Achilles heal to a screamer star is sniping out the herald with the Grimore. A chariot equipped herald with a Grimore becomes much harder to kill.
The only forbidden joining by the rules is an IC to a MC or Vehicle and we know it can work the other way around b/c we have an example in the Tyranid codex.
Shield Wall - A single Hive Tyrant may join a unit of Tyrant Guard EXACTLY as if it an an IC.
This with out doubt states a MCIC can join a non MC or Vehicle unit. It give IC to a HT joining them. If ICs can't join Vehicles or MC this would NOT work.
Mythra wrote: The only forbidden joining by the rules is an IC to a MC or Vehicle and we know it can work the other way around b/c we have an example in the Tyranid codex.
Shield Wall - A single Hive Tyrant may join a unit of Tyrant Guard EXACTLY as if it an an IC.
This with out doubt states a MCIC can join a non MC or Vehicle unit. It give IC to a HT joining them. If ICs can't join Vehicles or MC this would NOT work.
Ah, no. Shield wall, a rule that Tyrant Guard have, allow them to be joined.
You cannot attach a Tyrant to Generstealers.
This actually indicates that you need a specific special rule to break the general rule, and isn't a good reference for this thread.
Mythra wrote: The only forbidden joining by the rules is an IC to a MC or Vehicle and we know it can work the other way around b/c we have an example in the Tyranid codex.
Shield Wall - A single Hive Tyrant may join a unit of Tyrant Guard EXACTLY as if it an an IC.
This with out doubt states a MCIC can join a non MC or Vehicle unit. It give IC to a HT joining them. If ICs can't join Vehicles or MC this would NOT work.
Ah, no. Shield wall, a rule that Tyrant Guard have, allow them to be joined.
You cannot attach a Tyrant to Generstealers.
This actually indicates that you need a specific special rule to break the general rule, and isn't a good reference for this thread.
I don't think Hyve Tyrant can be used as an example of anything in this discussion since it doesn't have the independant character rule.
Mythra wrote: The only forbidden joining by the rules is an IC to a MC or Vehicle and we know it can work the other way around b/c we have an example in the Tyranid codex. Shield Wall - A single Hive Tyrant may join a unit of Tyrant Guard EXACTLY as if it an an IC. This with out doubt states a MCIC can join a non MC or Vehicle unit. It give IC to a HT joining them. If ICs can't join Vehicles or MC this would NOT work.
Ah, no. Shield wall, a rule that Tyrant Guard have, allow them to be joined. You cannot attach a Tyrant to Generstealers. This actually indicates that you need a specific special rule to break the general rule, and isn't a good reference for this thread.
Not really. The Tyrant doesnt have the IC rule, so of course you need a special rule to allow it to join a unit - it doesnt have the normal rule. It does however join as if it were an IC to the one unit they WANT you to join it to. It does tell you that IF MCICs could not join a unit then this rule would have no purpose, as the HY explicitly joins the TG unit as if it were an IC. It also shows that the join is indeed one way - the IC joins the unit, not the other way around. (and also gives an excellent example of why Naw was entirely unable to find a rule stating this, just handwaved it away again). YOu also have O'Vesa, who is an MCIC; he can join normal units, again proving the join (and the restrictions, e.g. MC containing units) are one way and one way only
Doesnt help with Vehicles, but given there isnt actually a rule prohibiting vehicles joining units, like there is for ICs joining vehicles, it doesnt actually matter.
Nem wrote: The overlords unit type would stay infantry - or he would be would be subject to vehicle rules (Having AV, no armor saves etc). The profile would have to remain infantry to work.
The CCB would remain a vehicle unit. The profile would remain a vehicle.
'Unit type' is not based on the actual unit, it is based on the model.
So... ?
When using them both together, they move etc like a Chariot, but still take their profiles as a separate (not both vehicles, not both infantry and not truly chariot) Changing in this way is quite unprecedented, which is causing (I am guessing) unforeseen problems.
Humor me if you will. What do you consider a Chariot? If all Chariots in 7th ed are Duel Profiles, (Vehicle and non-vehicle.) and this is obsequiously not what you consider to be a Chariot Model. then what do you consider to be a Chariot model?
So then If I am seeing what you are saying correctly, then the Chariot is not one model (Even though we are told it is always one model in the rule set)
So then how do we completely ignore the chariot rule set stating it is one model and treat it exactly as it was in 6th ed?. Where the rider is permitted certain actions while being embarked on in a Dedicated Transport?
If the Chariot suffers an explode result do we roll to wound it's one and only passenger as per the Transports and Explosions results? Does this Passenger make an emergency Disembark move and then roll a pinning check? Or do we remove the entire model?
A Chariot model can be riderless, which means there is no other profile but the chariot, and there are only a few Chariots that have no rider and all of them can be purchased as stand alone models, all of the rest have two profiles. Some of these Chariots are purchased as Squadrons where the rider is an upgrade to the Chariot; Where as other chariots like the CCB and a few of the daemon ones are purchased as upgrades for the Rider.
The CCB cannot be fielded without the Overlord, there is no way to do it under any circumstances.
The CCB is Purchased as an upgrade to an Overlord.
The Overlord is not purchased as an upgrade to the CCB.
Thus I argue that when an Overlord purchases a CCB as an upgrade, the CCB effectively becomes part of the Overlord Model(not the over way around), the model must follow all rules for the Overlord (IC,RP, EL) unless explicitly prohibited from doing so, as well as following all the rules for the Chariot unit type(Page 86 BRB), and all the rules for the CCB. (Sweep Attack, Symbiotic Repair, Fast, Skimmer, Open topped..ect). The AV of the Chariot profile does make for some interesting issues, that can be overcome. This combination of models is no different than a Sm captain taking a Bike upgrade, or a HT upgrading his profile to have wings.
Yes it is new, a Model that has both a vehicle and non-vehicle profile active at all times, where the controlling player can choose what shooting hits are allocated to which profile on the one model. (very new game mechanic)
Nem wrote: The overlords unit type would stay infantry - or he would be would be subject to vehicle rules (Having AV, no armor saves etc). The profile would have to remain infantry to work.
The CCB would remain a vehicle unit. The profile would remain a vehicle.
'Unit type' is not based on the actual unit, it is based on the model.
So... ?
When using them both together, they move etc like a Chariot, but still take their profiles as a separate (not both vehicles, not both infantry and not truly chariot) Changing in this way is quite unprecedented, which is causing (I am guessing) unforeseen problems.
Humor me if you will. What do you consider a Chariot? If all Chariots in 7th ed are Duel Profiles, (Vehicle and non-vehicle.) and this is obsequiously not what you consider to be a Chariot Model. then what do you consider to be a Chariot model?
So then If I am seeing what you are saying correctly, then the Chariot is not one model (Even though we are told it is always one model in the rule set)
So then how do we completely ignore the chariot rule set stating it is one model and treat it exactly as it was in 6th ed?. Where the rider is permitted certain actions while being embarked on in a Dedicated Transport?
If the Chariot suffers an explode result do we roll to wound it's one and only passenger as per the Transports and Explosions results? Does this Passenger make an emergency Disembark move and then roll a pinning check? Or do we remove the entire model?
A Chariot model can be riderless, which means there is no other profile but the chariot, and there are only a few Chariots that have no rider and all of them can be purchased as stand alone models, all of the rest have two profiles. Some of these Chariots are purchased as Squadrons where the rider is an upgrade to the Chariot; Where as other chariots like the CCB and a few of the daemon ones are purchased as upgrades for the Rider.
The CCB cannot be fielded without the Overlord, there is no way to do it under any circumstances.
The CCB is Purchased as an upgrade to an Overlord.
The Overlord is not purchased as an upgrade to the CCB.
Thus I argue that when an Overlord purchases a CCB as an upgrade, the CCB effectively becomes part of the Overlord Model(not the over way around), the model must follow all rules for the Overlord (IC,RP, EL) unless explicitly prohibited from doing so, as well as following all the rules for the Chariot unit type(Page 86 BRB), and all the rules for the CCB. (Sweep Attack, Symbiotic Repair, Fast, Skimmer, Open topped..ect). The AV of the Chariot profile does make for some interesting issues, that can be overcome. This combination of models is no different than a Sm captain taking a Bike upgrade, or a HT upgrading his profile to have wings.
Yes it is new, a Model that has both a vehicle and non-vehicle profile active at all times, where the controlling player can choose what shooting hits are allocated to which profile on the one model. (very new game mechanic)
How many weapons may the rider fire? Those rules which relate to infantry, or the rules which relate to vehicles? Or if they are one model how many can that model fire?
The rules are dodgy. It says the Riders weapons use the riders profile, and the chariots weapons use the chariot profile, and that the Rider can fire any weapon counting as stationary. If they were one model and that model had a firing limit.
If the Chariot suffers an explode result do we roll to wound it's one and only passenger as per the Transports and Explosions results? Does this Passenger make an emergency Disembark move and then roll a pinning check? Or do we remove the entire model? The Chariot rules list what to do in these circumstances. The rules tell you to remove the entire model if either the rider or the chariot is removed.
Though note above, the Chariot can suffer results that effect the Rider as-a-passenger. When Crew is stunned does this effect the Chariot vehicle part also?
And there is still a world of difference between taking a bike and taking a chariot. The fact chariots need more extensive rules while bikes just modify a profile is a bit of a clue.
Nem wrote: The overlords unit type would stay infantry - or he would be would be subject to vehicle rules (Having AV, no armor saves etc). The profile would have to remain infantry to work.
The CCB would remain a vehicle unit. The profile would remain a vehicle.
'Unit type' is not based on the actual unit, it is based on the model.
So... ?
When using them both together, they move etc like a Chariot, but still take their profiles as a separate (not both vehicles, not both infantry and not truly chariot) Changing in this way is quite unprecedented, which is causing (I am guessing) unforeseen problems.
Humor me if you will. What do you consider a Chariot? If all Chariots in 7th ed are Duel Profiles, (Vehicle and non-vehicle.) and this is obsequiously not what you consider to be a Chariot Model. then what do you consider to be a Chariot model?
So then If I am seeing what you are saying correctly, then the Chariot is not one model (Even though we are told it is always one model in the rule set)
So then how do we completely ignore the chariot rule set stating it is one model and treat it exactly as it was in 6th ed?. Where the rider is permitted certain actions while being embarked on in a Dedicated Transport?
If the Chariot suffers an explode result do we roll to wound it's one and only passenger as per the Transports and Explosions results? Does this Passenger make an emergency Disembark move and then roll a pinning check? Or do we remove the entire model?
A Chariot model can be riderless, which means there is no other profile but the chariot, and there are only a few Chariots that have no rider and all of them can be purchased as stand alone models, all of the rest have two profiles. Some of these Chariots are purchased as Squadrons where the rider is an upgrade to the Chariot; Where as other chariots like the CCB and a few of the daemon ones are purchased as upgrades for the Rider.
The CCB cannot be fielded without the Overlord, there is no way to do it under any circumstances.
The CCB is Purchased as an upgrade to an Overlord.
The Overlord is not purchased as an upgrade to the CCB.
Thus I argue that when an Overlord purchases a CCB as an upgrade, the CCB effectively becomes part of the Overlord Model(not the over way around), the model must follow all rules for the Overlord (IC,RP, EL) unless explicitly prohibited from doing so, as well as following all the rules for the Chariot unit type(Page 86 BRB), and all the rules for the CCB. (Sweep Attack, Symbiotic Repair, Fast, Skimmer, Open topped..ect). The AV of the Chariot profile does make for some interesting issues, that can be overcome. This combination of models is no different than a Sm captain taking a Bike upgrade, or a HT upgrading his profile to have wings.
Yes it is new, a Model that has both a vehicle and non-vehicle profile active at all times, where the controlling player can choose what shooting hits are allocated to which profile on the one model. (very new game mechanic)
How many weapons may the rider fire? Those rules which relate to infantry, or the rules which relate to vehicles? Or if they are one model how many can that model fire?
The rules are dodgy. It says the Riders weapons use the riders profile, and the chariots weapons use the chariot profile, and that the Rider can fire any weapon counting as stationary. If they were one model and that model had a firing limit.
If the Chariot suffers an explode result do we roll to wound it's one and only passenger as per the Transports and Explosions results? Does this Passenger make an emergency Disembark move and then roll a pinning check? Or do we remove the entire model? The Chariot rules list what to do in these circumstances. The rules tell you to remove the entire model if either the rider or the chariot is removed.
Though note above, the Chariot can suffer results that effect the Rider as-a-passenger. When Crew is stunned does this effect the Chariot vehicle part also?
And there is still a world of difference between taking a bike and taking a chariot. The fact chariots need more extensive rules while bikes just modify a profile is a bit of a clue.
It's not just CCB & NO & AV issues.
So how many Profiles does a Chariot have? What rules are given to address the issue of what each profile can do? Yes there are.
Do the Chariot rules explain how Vehicle Damage results effect the rider. Yes they do.
If you are correct in your statement that the rider's unit type does not change and remains Infantry, then because the Chariot is not a Transport, and the chariot model is effected by the rules and restrictions of both profiles. The Chariot would have a Maximum movement of 6in in the movement phase due to the movement rules requiring it move only as fast as the units slowest profile. and could only run a D6 re-rolling and never flat out. Is that in-fact the case?, If so then all Chariots are RAW unplayable, by your inference.
Are we given permission in the rules to wound (as per the transports and explodes result rule) the rider if the Chariot suffers an explode result? There is no
permission given, as the rider is not being transported by the chariot but is part of the entire model.
Are we given permission in the rules to ignore the rider profile if the rider loses it last wound? No we remove both from play if one is slain/destroyed.
Does a Chariot have the (Transport) vehicle type? The CCB's unit type is: Vehicle (Chariot, Fact, Open-topped, Skimmer), The CCB is no longer a Transport vehicle.
The Chariot is not a transport, and in the new rule set it has become an extension of its rider, and in some cases a riderless stand alone model.
Part of the reason that Chariots need more rules now, is that before they were nothing more than a Dedicated Transport Vehicle. (In 6th ed there was less than 2/3 a page given to explaining Chariot rules, where as in 7th ed there are 2 pages of explanation.) Now Chariots are no longer a Dedicated Transport Vehicles but a Hybrid between a Ridden mount(Like a Bike or Cavalry) and a vehicle very similar to what they were before (Which to the best of my knowledge has never been done before in 40K) So more rules are needed to explain how this model interacts with the rest of the 40K world.
Nem wrote: The overlords unit type would stay infantry - or he would be would be subject to vehicle rules (Having AV, no armor saves etc). The profile would have to remain infantry to work.
The CCB would remain a vehicle unit. The profile would remain a vehicle.
'Unit type' is not based on the actual unit, it is based on the model.
So... ?
When using them both together, they move etc like a Chariot, but still take their profiles as a separate (not both vehicles, not both infantry and not truly chariot) Changing in this way is quite unprecedented, which is causing (I am guessing) unforeseen problems.
Humor me if you will. What do you consider a Chariot? If all Chariots in 7th ed are Duel Profiles, (Vehicle and non-vehicle.) and this is obsequiously not what you consider to be a Chariot Model. then what do you consider to be a Chariot model?
So then If I am seeing what you are saying correctly, then the Chariot is not one model (Even though we are told it is always one model in the rule set)
So then how do we completely ignore the chariot rule set stating it is one model and treat it exactly as it was in 6th ed?. Where the rider is permitted certain actions while being embarked on in a Dedicated Transport?
If the Chariot suffers an explode result do we roll to wound it's one and only passenger as per the Transports and Explosions results? Does this Passenger make an emergency Disembark move and then roll a pinning check? Or do we remove the entire model?
A Chariot model can be riderless, which means there is no other profile but the chariot, and there are only a few Chariots that have no rider and all of them can be purchased as stand alone models, all of the rest have two profiles. Some of these Chariots are purchased as Squadrons where the rider is an upgrade to the Chariot; Where as other chariots like the CCB and a few of the daemon ones are purchased as upgrades for the Rider.
The CCB cannot be fielded without the Overlord, there is no way to do it under any circumstances.
The CCB is Purchased as an upgrade to an Overlord.
The Overlord is not purchased as an upgrade to the CCB.
Thus I argue that when an Overlord purchases a CCB as an upgrade, the CCB effectively becomes part of the Overlord Model(not the over way around), the model must follow all rules for the Overlord (IC,RP, EL) unless explicitly prohibited from doing so, as well as following all the rules for the Chariot unit type(Page 86 BRB), and all the rules for the CCB. (Sweep Attack, Symbiotic Repair, Fast, Skimmer, Open topped..ect). The AV of the Chariot profile does make for some interesting issues, that can be overcome. This combination of models is no different than a Sm captain taking a Bike upgrade, or a HT upgrading his profile to have wings.
Yes it is new, a Model that has both a vehicle and non-vehicle profile active at all times, where the controlling player can choose what shooting hits are allocated to which profile on the one model. (very new game mechanic)
How many weapons may the rider fire? Those rules which relate to infantry, or the rules which relate to vehicles? Or if they are one model how many can that model fire?
The rules are dodgy. It says the Riders weapons use the riders profile, and the chariots weapons use the chariot profile, and that the Rider can fire any weapon counting as stationary. If they were one model and that model had a firing limit.
If the Chariot suffers an explode result do we roll to wound it's one and only passenger as per the Transports and Explosions results? Does this Passenger make an emergency Disembark move and then roll a pinning check? Or do we remove the entire model? The Chariot rules list what to do in these circumstances. The rules tell you to remove the entire model if either the rider or the chariot is removed.
Though note above, the Chariot can suffer results that effect the Rider as-a-passenger. When Crew is stunned does this effect the Chariot vehicle part also?
And there is still a world of difference between taking a bike and taking a chariot. The fact chariots need more extensive rules while bikes just modify a profile is a bit of a clue.
It's not just CCB & NO & AV issues.
So how many Profiles does a Chariot have? What rules are given to address the issue of what each profile can do? Yes there are.
Do the Chariot rules explain how Vehicle Damage results effect the rider. Yes they do.
If you are correct in your statement that the rider's unit type does not change and remains Infantry, then because the Chariot is not a Transport, and the chariot model is effected by the rules and restrictions of both profiles. The Chariot would have a Maximum movement of 6in in the movement phase due to the movement rules requiring it move only as fast as the units slowest profile. and could only run a D6 re-rolling and never flat out. Is that in-fact the case?, If so then all Chariots are RAW unplayable, by your inference.
Actually no, because the chariot rules tell you how a chariot model moves, so that is a mute point.
Are we given permission in the rules to wound (as per the transports and explodes result rule) the rider if the Chariot suffers an explode result? There is no
permission given, as the rider is not being transported by the chariot but is part of the entire model.
Are we given permission in the rules to ignore the rider profile if the rider loses it last wound? No we remove both from play if one is slain/destroyed.
Does a Chariot have the (Transport) vehicle type? The CCB's unit type is: Vehicle (Chariot, Fact, Open-topped, Skimmer), The CCB is no longer a Transport vehicle.
The Chariot is not a transport, and in the new rule set it has become an extension of its rider, and in some cases a riderless stand alone model.
Then why do the chariot rules mention exceptions to SOME passenger related vehicle results but not others?
I don't have the BRB on me at the moment but I'm assuming the part about chariot losing transport rule is in there... though I am dubious
The FAQ and errata remove transport from it's type and the rider is referred to as just that not a passenger. Not sure what else you need to convince you they are not transport per the rules. Since it is not a transport the rules it mentions are they only ones that have an affect at all on the rider if they state they do.
Are we now debating whether or not a Rider is the same as a Transported Unit Nem?
If the Rider is in fact a transported unit, then how do we account for the rider being an equal part of the Chariot Model?
It has been established some time ago(between pages1-14 of this thread) that a Overlord with a CCB has the ICUSR, and that there is nothing in the ICUSR that prevents a Vehicle with IC from Joining a Unit.
The Issue that has arisen is how to Wound a Unit with a CCB/Overlord attached to it.
I found the Idea for wounding/Damaging a Vehicle Squadron might be the best way to handle this issue.
As for the Chariot Rules giving specific instruction on what effects the rider when affected by certain Damage results, that is part of the Chariot rule set (BRB page 86) no different that how a Grounding Check affects a FMC, or a Jump unit handles landing in Difficult terrain. We must remember this is a old unit type with new rules to better explain how it works.
Nem wrote: Actually no, because the chariot rules tell you how a chariot model moves, so that is a mute point.
Moot, not mute.
Thanks
BLADERIKER wrote: Are we now debating whether or not a Rider is the same as a Transported Unit Nem?
If the Rider is in fact a transported unit, then how do we account for the rider being an equal part of the Chariot Model?
It has been established some time ago(between pages1-14 of this thread) that a Overlord with a CCB has the ICUSR, and that there is nothing in the ICUSR that prevents a Vehicle with IC from Joining a Unit.
The Issue that has arisen is how to Wound a Unit with a CCB/Overlord attached to it.
I found the Idea for wounding/Damaging a Vehicle Squadron might be the best way to handle this issue.
As for the Chariot Rules giving specific instruction on what effects the rider when affected by certain Damage results, that is part of the Chariot rule set (BRB page 86) no different that how a Grounding Check affects a FMC, or a Jump unit handles landing in Difficult terrain. We must remember this is a old unit type with new rules to better explain how it works.
The passenger bit came up during other things as much is dependent on the answer of another, the original disagreement was around what unit type is the Chariot + Rider and the Chariot & Rider, while discussing other rules come in. But we seem to be moving on from one thing to another without actually addressing the last. I think there are a few problem with the rules as they are and they are not accounting for a few things. The main argument in this thread is based on the rules that USR's apply to models, and the Chariot is one model with two profiles.
I can not dispute that, but I can apply that argument to other areas as the rules as a whole are written as 'this effects models' or 'this effects units' - Nothing in the rules only effects (affects?) profiles - because it would have never been a issue before this.
So on passengers.
I'll refer to the vehicle as the chariot, and the character as the rider, as this is how it is referred to in the rules.
Note; in newer publications the vehicles in question actually have the Chariot unit type, this wasn't given to the CCB via the Necron FAQ but we can assume they mean it to be.
While the Chariot rules do not specify the rider is embarked out right, it is insinuated in these points.
-It does specify the rider of the chariot can not disembark.
-Chariot is carrying the rider.
-All the Chariot Vehicles I've looked at are Open topped, which only matters to rules around passengers, these were not removed.
Particularly the last point is important in conjunction with the unit type of the model, and how it pertains to shooting. If the model is a vehicle, and the rider is not a passenger, you have to fall back on the vehicle rules for shooting, which means you are measuring the LOS from the riders weapons down the barrel, as he does not get the open topped passenger rule, and the model is not a infantry model.
That's before we get to how many weapons each or both or the one model can shoot, but again has a direct impact.
Of course, to admit the rider is a infantry model or a passenger is to admit the rules around giving something to a model via the rules may not be as watertight as first approached, and that in fact not everything from each profile which is applied to models is shared.
The chariot unit type is vehicle (chariot) just like it says in the Necron FAQ for the CCB.
The inferences could be a thousand fold and it still wouldn't affect the fact that it tells you to always treat them as one model. -It does specify the rider of the chariot can not disembark. - It also specifies if one is destroyed the other is removed, not wounded / damaged in any way, as opposed to transport destruction. -Chariot is carrying the rider. - It's also carrying a weapon does that mean it's weapons are their own models as well? -All the Chariot Vehicles I've looked at are Open topped, which only matters to rules around passengers, these were not removed. - Except for that pesky easier to blow up bit.....
The rider can retain it's entire profile and not change a thing so long as you remember to always treat him and the chariot as one model.
Gravmyr wrote: The chariot unit type is vehicle (chariot) just like it says in the Necron FAQ for the CCB.
The inferences could be a thousand fold and it still wouldn't affect the fact that it tells you to always treat them as one model.
-It does specify the rider of the chariot can not disembark. - It also specifies if one is destroyed the other is removed, not wounded / damaged in any way, as opposed to transport destruction.
-Chariot is carrying the rider. - It's also carrying a weapon does that mean it's weapons are their own models as well?
-All the Chariot Vehicles I've looked at are Open topped, which only matters to rules around passengers, these were not removed. - Except for that pesky easier to blow up bit.....
The rider can retain it's entire profile and not change a thing so long as you remember to always treat him and the chariot as one model.
That's fine with me, it's just making aware of what exactly one model for everything means, possible snap shots dependent- damage results applying to the rider and vehicle eg weapon destroyed, vehicle LOS from the rider. Having to follow the vehicle rules is a bit of a stick in the mud.
Personally, I don't see the point in things like rules giving the rider Fearless and Relentless if everything is shared anyway, and neither is apparently needed. But hayho.
As per the Necron FAQ the CCB has had its unit type changed to Chariot. (Third Page)
Open Top, adds a +1 to the Vehicle Damage Table. There is no other Benefit that Open top gives to a Chariot that is not already spelled out in the Chariot rule set.
Also It can be argued that a Weapon destroyed result will not destroy the Riders Melee Weapon due to {BRB Page 87: "damage results that do not destroy the Chariot do not affect the way its rider fights". And taking away (In the case of a Warscythe) [+2 Strength, Armourbane, AP1,] does affect how the Overlord/rider fights.
Treating the Chariot and Rider as one model is the issue discussed here in.
We are instructed to always treat it as one model, then we are given exceptions to this rule in the Chariot Rule set, much like the one I posted above.
In normal cases an embarked unit who's transport suffers a Crew Stunned result is force to pass a Moral Check or Snapshot in their next shooting phase (BRB Page 82)
There are no rules for how a unit embarked within a transport may attack from their Transport into an Assault. (At least that I can find)
