Just to make sure I'm not cheating here:

If I put a unit (let's say 4 pallies with psychotrokes and draigo) in a Storm Raven, and my army also includes Karamazov, can I do the following?

On turn one, I move my storm raven flat-out toward target of my choice.
In shooting, I fire the Storm Raven's gun via PotMS.
Then I shoot the Raven with a Strength 10, AP 1 lance from Karamazov, resulting in a wreck/destroyed result (for the sake of argument).
According to the INAT, I'm pretty sure Draigo+squad can now assault, as Ravens are Assault Vehicles.


1. Is this legal without INAT?
2. Is this legal with INAT?
3. Would you try this tactic in a game?

You aren't allowed to disembark on a turn you moved flat out, so the models inside will be destroyed.

There are a few things wrong with your situation.

#1 If a transport that moves flat out is destroyed in the same turn that it went flat out, everyone embarked is destroyed.

#2 you can not assault if the transport you were in moved flat out even with the assault vehicle rule.


However the following is 100% legal:

On turn one, I move my storm raven flat-out toward target of my choice.
In shooting, I fire [one] Storm Raven gun via PotMS.
Then I shoot the Raven with a Strength 10, AP 1 lance from Karamazov, resulting in a wreck/destroyed result.

But as I noted all embarked passengers are destroyed in the situation you outlined.

Can you quote the relevant rules to back up your statements?

I found this one, but it doesn't seem to help.
Q: If a transport vehicle is destroyed in a Movement phase in which it has moved flat out, what happens to any embarked models, as passengers may not disembark from a vehicle that has moved flat out in that Movement phase? (p70)
A: They are removed as casualties.

Page 70 in the BRB under 'Fast Transport Vehicles'

"Passengers may not embark or disembark from a fast vehicle if it has moved (Or is going to move) flat out in that movement phase."

Kitzz wrote:Can you quote the relevant rules to back up your statements?

I found this one, but it doesn't seem to help.
Q: If a transport vehicle is destroyed in a Movement phase in which it has moved flat out, what happens to any embarked models, as passengers may not disembark from a vehicle that has moved flat out in that Movement phase? (p70)
A: They are removed as casualties.

They ruled it this way to prevent Fast tanks from tank shocking getting exploded and having the passengers assault that turn.

No reason they would rule any differently in the situation you described.

theres nothing in the rulebook to say that units inside a destroyed vehicle that went flat out are killed, does it say this in an FAQ?

There are two rules we look at to determine that "units inside a destroyed vehicle that went flat out are killed"

#1 I posted above 'Fast Transport Vehicles' BRB P.70 "Passengers may not embark or disembark from a fast vehicle if it has moved (Or is going to move) flat out in that movement phase."

#2 Disembarking BRB P.67 talks of disembarking and emergency disembarking and goes on to say "If even this disembarkation is impossible, they can't disembark."

Then we are left with a situation where models can't disembark, but they must disembark. and the FaQ is a similar situation, they must disembark because the vehicle was wrecked, but they cant disembark because of flat out.

So they are destroyed.

From the wording it seems to imply if the vehicle was destroyed during it's "owning player's turn" then they would not be able to disembark. It doesn't clarify if this would continue into the next turn when the vehicle is attacked.

So if the "mad russian" blows up his own Storm Raven then the guys inside will die, however don't forget a storm raven has the "Shadow Skies" ability that still allows models to deep strike even when the model moved flat-out (such a thing would probably need to be utilized during your movement phase though to prevent issues).

If the Storm Raven was destroyed during the opponents turn then the paladins would simply exit the vehicle and take any required pinning tests.

They problem with your current theory, DR, is that they are disembarking in the shooting phase if anything.

Kitzz wrote:They problem with your current theory, DR, is that they are disembarking in the shooting phase if anything.

In the previous FAQ the "in a Movement phase" was "in a turn". This raised a lot of questions about what happened to an embarked unit if the transport was destroyed in the opponent's turn. This was not really a problem, because if unspecified, "turn" means "player turn." Apparently GW cleared this up in the current FAQ regardless. The current wording seems to imply that if the transport is destroyed in the owning player's shooting phase, the unit would still be allowed to disembark and assault afterwards because of the Assault Vehicle rule.

However, this is an FAQ, not an errata. It clarifies rather than replaces. So DR's reasoning is still valid. As stated in the rulebook, during a [player's] turn in which the transport moves flat out, units are not allowed to disembark, not even by emergency disembarking. So they are still destroyed if the transport is destroyed.

Again, the rule he rests his argument on only mentions the movement phase. It says nothing about the shooting phase, which is the phase in question.

That aside, my devious plan doesn't work for a different reason:

Q: Do any upgrades or special rules a vehicle has cease to work once it is destroyed? (p61)
A: Yes. For example if a Land Raider Crusader is destroyed by ramming an enemy vehicle, its embarked passengers would not be able to launch an assault in the ensuing Assault phase as they would no longer benefit from its Assault Vehicle special rule.

Kitzz wrote:Again, the rule he rests his argument on only mentions the movement phase. It says nothing about the shooting phase, which is the phase in question.

You are confusing rule and FAQ. The rule is on page 70 of the Rulebook (section "Fast Transport Vehicles"). The FAQ clarifies that rule. The rule says you cannot disembark and still applies, independent of what the FAQ says.

In case of the Land Raider, the unit can still disembark, because they are able to disembark from a vehicle that has moved at combat/cruising speed.

I'm guessing that "turn" was changed to "movement phase" because there are very. very.very few ways to blow up your vehicle in your shooting phase (I can think of 2, Chaos Dreadnought 'frenzy', and Karamazov, although I don't know what Karamazov's rule actually is, I'm going off what is in this thread.).

'Fast Transport Vehicles' BRB P.70 "Passengers may not embark or disembark from a fast vehicle if it has moved (Or is going to move) flat out in that movement phase."

If the vehicle moved flat out, Passengers may not embark or disembark.

I do not see how that is not clear.

The old (now irrelevant) Vindicare could shoot down a friendly flier in the movement phase.

DeathReaper wrote:'Fast Transport Vehicles' BRB P.70 "Passengers may not embark or disembark from a fast vehicle if it has moved (Or is going to move) flat out in that movement phase."

If the vehicle moved flat out, Passengers may not embark or disembark.

I do not see how that is not clear.

Right, but the last two words in that rule state that they cannot disembark in that movement phase. It does not say anything about the shooting phase. If the rule did not have "in that movement phase" then one can assume that you can never disembark. However with the last two words referencing that movement phase, you can conclude that the units can disembark as long as it isn't in the same phase that you moved flat out.

Of course it could also have meant to be read from only the players perspective, not accounting the chance that the vehicle may be destroyed. Just refering to what the player may do with his units.

This is taken from page 67 of the 5th edition rulebook: Emergency disembarkation - the models are deployed anywhere within two inches of the vehicle's hull, but the unit can't do anything else for the rest of the turn. If even this disembarkation is impossible, they can't disembark.

Page 70, 5th edition rulebook: Passengers may not embark or disembark from a fast vehicle if it has moved (Or is going to move) flat out in that movement phase.

From the FAQ: Q: If a transport vehicle is destroyed in a Movement phase in which it has moved flat out, what happens to any embarked models, as passengers may not disembark from a vehicle that has moved flat out in that Movement phase? (p70)
A: They are removed as casualties.

The storm raven is the OP's post is destroyed in the shooting phase. The FAQ and the rule from page 70 do not apply in this situation, since they explicitly mention something that happens in the movement phase. The rule from page 67 clarifies the issue in my opinion, but it seems to be where some of the posters are getting hung up. Some people are reading, "...If even this disembarkation is impossible, they can't disembark," and applying it to both the rule from page 70 and the FAQ, neither of which apply here because the storm raven is not being destroyed in the movement phase, but rather in the following shooting phase.

I think that the only thing that this, "If even this disembarkation is impossible, they can't disembark," is referring to is this, "the models are deployed anywhere within two inches of the vehicle's hull." If the models can not be deployed within two inches of the hull, because of impassable terrain or the hull being surrounded by enemy models/other vehicles, then they are destroyed. It has nothing to do with the flat-out rules.

As long as there is space to deploy those troops, and the vehicle was not destroyed in the movement phase, then the troops should be able to disembark via the emergency disembarkation rules.

Happyjew wrote:I'm guessing that "turn" was changed to "movement phase" because there are very. very.very few ways to blow up your vehicle in your shooting phase (I can think of 2, Chaos Dreadnought 'frenzy', and Karamazov, although I don't know what Karamazov's rule actually is, I'm going off what is in this thread.).

An unlucky scatter result for a friendly blast/large blast will also do it

Ignatius wrote:
Right, but the last two words in that rule state that they cannot disembark in that movement phase. It does not say anything about the shooting phase. If the rule did not have "in that movement phase" then one can assume that you can never disembark. However with the last two words referencing that movement phase, you can conclude that the units can disembark as long as it isn't in the same phase that you moved flat out.

Uh. . . no. It says that they cannot disembark if the vehicle MOVED flat-out in that movement phase; meaning, the movement phase of that turn. Nowhere does it restrict the 'cannot disembark' to ONLY the Movement phase; if they are somehow unfortunately forced to disembark in the Shooting phase of that same turn, they still cannot disembark and are still destroyed.

BeRzErKeR wrote:

Uh. . . no. It says that they cannot disembark if the vehicle MOVED flat-out in that movement phase; meaning, the movement phase of that turn. Nowhere does it restrict the 'cannot disembark' to ONLY the Movement phase; if they are somehow unfortunately forced to disembark in the Shooting phase of that same turn, they still cannot disembark and are still destroyed.

Fair enough. My mind has fully processed the rule in question. I had read it in a different light. It literally states that a unit cannot disembark during any following phase if it has moved flat out in the movement phase. I had comprehended it as limiting to the movement phase. In effect, if it moved flat out, they will never disembark.

Ja.

BeRzErKeR wrote:
Uh. . . no. It says that they cannot disembark if the vehicle MOVED flat-out in that movement phase; meaning, the movement phase of that turn. Nowhere does it restrict the 'cannot disembark' to ONLY the Movement phase; if they are somehow unfortunately forced to disembark in the Shooting phase of that same turn, they still cannot disembark and are still destroyed.

No, they changed to wording from destroyed that turn to destroyed in a movement phase.
There is no mention of the turn, the FAQ now is in line with the BRB (page70) the only restriction to (dis)embarking is in the movement phase.
BRB FAQ

Q: If a transport vehicle is destroyed in a Movement
phase in which it has moved flat out, what happens to
any embarked models, as passengers may not
disembark from a vehicle that has moved flat out in
that Movement phase? (p70)
A: They are removed as casualties.

SeattleDV8 wrote: the FAQ now is in line with the BRB (page70) the only restriction to (dis)embarking is in the movement phase.
BRB FAQ

Q: If a transport vehicle is destroyed in a Movement
phase in which it has moved flat out, what happens to
any embarked models, as passengers may not
disembark from a vehicle that has moved flat out in
that Movement phase? (p70)
A: They are removed as casualties.

The underlined is not true.

There is a restriction on disembarking If the vehicle has moved flat out in that movement phase.

Look at Page 70 again, it says X may not happen IF Y has or is going to happen in that movement phase.

Lets break down the rule. It gives us a restriction on disembarking (Passengers may not disembark). It gives us a type of vehicle the restriction applies to (from a fast vehicle). It gives a condition on the restriction (if it has moved flat out in that movement phase).

So if It (The fast vehicle) has moved flat out in that movement phase, then Passengers may not disembark.

'Fast Transport Vehicles' BRB P.70 "Passengers may not embark or disembark from a fast vehicle if it has moved (Or is going to move) flat out in that movement phase."

Essentially, if the transport moves flat out in the movement phase, then the rule is saying that at no time during the rest of your turn, and the opposing players turn may the unit become disembarked

Really? sorry gents but that was the old FAQ that stopped disembarking in the whole turn.
The only part of the turn mentioned in the new FAQ is the Movement phase.
The only part of the turn mentioned on page 70 is the Movement phase.
It fact the FAQ is only concerned with a transport being destroyed in it's movement phase if it also was moving Flat Out.
There is nothing that even hints that the entire turn has a restriction now.
Let the old FAQ go, it has no standing .
The term 'turn' (game or player) is not used and as such the rule only applies in the phase that is used, the movement phase.

SeattleDV8 wrote:The only part of the turn mentioned on page 70 is the Movement phase.
The term 'turn' (game or player) is not used and as such the rule only applies in the phase that is used, the movement phase.

Again, read the breakdown.

The line that says "if it has moved flat out in that movement phase" It refers to the vehicle that has moved flat out in that movement phase and nothing more.

So if a fast vehicle has moved flat out in that movement phase, then the Passengers may not disembark.


The FaQ says passengers can not assault if you wreck your vehicle in the movement phase.

No reason to think otherwise about the shooting phase.

Why would you try to blow up your storm raven anyway?

That alot of pts to waste.

DR has the correct breakdown

Of course you have to add a subliminal "that turn" into the BRB, as otherwise technically you cannot ever disembark....

But, nos, if you do, what's to prevent me from thinking the "subliminal" part applies to the entire game? You're just interpreting the rule and adding an arbitrary timeframe to what it says.

Now I know for certain that the assault part doesn't work, but moving 24" with a unit of pallies isn't that bad. Given that they will likely be able to shoot in that shooting phase, the question is still relevant. It's also relevant to scattering weapons that can potentially hit your own units.

As to why you would use this tactic, I think the benefits of positioning are fairly obvious. If this is used in a later turn to grab an objective by transporting a scoring unit, the scoring unit can also fire on whatever other unit is sitting on said objective.

Just because an old edition of the rules said one thing does not mean that the same rule applies. For whatever reason, they changed the FAQ. A change to the rulebook is not really that much different. I don't make the argument that I can use the old vehicle damage table system from 3rd ed or 4th ed just because the rules used to work that way.

nosferatu1001 wrote:DR has the correct breakdown

Of course you have to add a subliminal "that turn" into the BRB, as otherwise technically you cannot ever disembark....

No, you do not add things to the rules willy nilly,
Especially when there is a timing stated.
The FAQ states when the unit is removed as casualties.
That is when the vehicle " is destroyed in a Movement
phase in which it has moved flat out"
The rule now only is triggered 'in the movement phase'.

SeattleDV8 wrote:

nosferatu1001 wrote:DR has the correct breakdown

Of course you have to add a subliminal "that turn" into the BRB, as otherwise technically you cannot ever disembark....

No, you do not add things to the rules willy nilly,
Especially when there is a timing stated.
The FAQ states when the unit is removed as casualties.
That is when the vehicle " is destroyed in a Movement
phase in which it has moved flat out"
The rule now only is triggered 'in the movement phase'.

It's not adding things willy nilly - it's using context. The words "that movement phase" means the movement phase of the turn in question.

SeattleDV8 wrote:
No, you do not add things to the rules willy nilly,
Especially when there is a timing stated.
The FAQ states when the unit is removed as casualties.
That is when the vehicle " is destroyed in a Movement
phase in which it has moved flat out"
The rule now only is triggered 'in the movement phase'.

False. The FAQ does not add a limitation to the rule.

The FAQ question was giving a clarification of a specific situation, not making a general ruling. It never says that there are not OTHER times, as well, when the passengers may be removed as casualties.

That being so, we then have to go back to the rule and read the text; and it tells us that the passengers are removed if the transport is destroyed that turn.

Now, if the transport is destroyed in the ENEMY'S turn, the passengers are NOT removed (since 'turn' indicates 'player turn' unless otherwise specified); so basically the only way you could get the passengers to be removed except in the Movement phase is by either deliberately shooting your own vehicle or having a blast scatter onto it. But it does disallow this particular 'tactic' of blowing up your own transport to let your troops fall out.

Yes, it does, but it states "in that movement phase"
That locks the rule/FAQ to that phase.
Nowhere are you given permission to use it in another phase, turn or even complete game.
Both the rule on page 70 and the FAQ uses the same term.
You don't need context, it's all there.
Your getting hung up on the old FAQ which was a turn.
Please give me a quote on this rule that uses the word turn, otherwise you're just making things up.

No, it says you cannot disembark if the vehicle moved flat out that movement phase

It does not say you cannot disembark that movement phase if the vehicle moved flat out.

The rulebook states the unit cannot disembark in that turn. The FAQ (which is a clarification, not an errata) clarifies that this means if you destroy your own transport in the movement phase the unit dies. The FAQ answer does not say that if you destroy the transport in some other phase that the unit doesn't die.

You might want to read it a little closer Nos.

Q: If a transport vehicle is destroyed in a Movement
phase in which it has moved flat out, what happens to
any embarked models, as passengers may not
disembark from a vehicle that has moved flat out in
that Movement phase? (p70)
A: They are removed as casualties.

The FAQ has three qualifiers
1. vehicle destroyed
2. In a movement phase
3. the vehicle went flat out in that movement phase.
therefore an embarked unit is removed as casualties

The second qualifier tells us this only happens now "in the movement phase".

We are given the time this can happen and it's not the turn.
The turn is never mentioned.We do not have permission to destroy the embarked unit except during the movement phase.

The main rulebook says the unit may not disembark, and that prohibition is not limited to the movement phase.

The fact that the FAQ is answering a more specific question, and only mentions the movement phase, does not lift the broader prohibition in the rulebook.

Mannahnin wrote:The main rulebook says the unit may not disembark, and that prohibition is not limited to the movement phase.

The fact that the FAQ is answering a more specific question, and only mentions the movement phase, does not lift the broader prohibition in the rulebook.

This. The FAQ is not overriding the main rulebook, it's clarifying it.

Except the BRB also never mentions the turn.
Fast Transport Vehicles BRB P.70

[Passengers may not embark or disembark from a fast vehicle if it has moved (Or is going to move) flat out in that movement phase."

Granted this line is directed at the vehicles movement in it's phase, but nothing here states how long the embarked unit cannot disembark.
Is it the movement phase, the turn, a game turn or even the rest of the game?
It doesn't address it directly.
Therefore we have to go to the FAQ, which does give us a time frame, the movement phase.
It's one of the many things that GW changed with this batch of FAQ's.
The time frame was the turn, now it is the movemnt phase.
Come on guys! Embrace the change...heh

Actually with the new FAQ, this may allow you to shoot down your own bird and then assault...

SeattleDV8 wrote:Except the BRB also never mentions the turn.
Fast Transport Vehicles BRB P.70

[Passengers may not embark or disembark from a fast vehicle if it has moved (Or is going to move) flat out in that movement phase."

Granted this line is directed at the vehicles movement in it's phase, but nothing here states how long the embarked unit cannot disembark.
Is it the movement phase, the turn, a game turn or even the rest of the game?

Since it does not specify, we try to discern their meaning.

So we are disallowed from disembarking if the vehicle moved flat out in that movement phase.

In that movement phase must refer to the movement phase of the current turn.

It can not mean all game, since it refers to that movement phase.

So every movement phase w must evaluate if models can disembark.

Rephistorch wrote:Actually with the new FAQ, this may allow you to shoot down your own bird and then assault...

If you want to shoot down your own 200+ pt. transport just to assault, be my guest. I'll even let you re-roll your armour pen.

You also could NEVER assault, as as soon as the vehilce is destroyed it loses any special rules, like Assault Vehicle, leaving you out of a vehicle that has moved and is not open topped or assault vehicle, meaning you cannot assault

Seattle - as has been pointed out, the FAQ does NOT limit you to which part of the turn you cannot disembark, just reiterates that disembarking in the movement phase of that turn is not possible. The BRB limits it to that entire turn

nosferatu1001 wrote:You also could NEVER assault, as as soon as the vehilce is destroyed it loses any special rules, like Assault Vehicle, leaving you out of a vehicle that has moved and is not open topped or assault vehicle, meaning you cannot assault

Seattle - as has been pointed out, the FAQ does NOT limit you to which part of the turn you cannot disembark, just reiterates that disembarking in the movement phase of that turn is not possible. The BRB limits it to that entire turn

But the BRB doesn't actually specify that they can not disembark the whole turn. It appears to say that they can't disembark in "that movement phase". Normally, this is the only time you can voluntarily disembark, so it makes sense that this is the restriction. The FAQ was the only thing that said turn, but they have changed it to reflect the actual wording of the BRB.

Also, you could most certainly still assault, as the vehicle you disembarked from allows you to do so. Yes, the vehicle is gone, but when you disembarked you would still reference the vehicle as to where you could disembark from, wouldn't you? If access points still count, and those are part of the vehicle's rules, it would stand to reason that the Assault Vehicle rule would still count as well.

Also, this is definitely not something I would actually use in a game... Blowing up my own stormraven would just pain me. Although, I can definitely see where it could be tactically advantageous. Draigo+Librarian+Paladins would be a nasty first turn assault into a nice juicy target. Sure, it would cost you 200+ pts, but if you could destroy an especially expensive, nasty squad, it could be worth it.

The BRB says they can not disembark without giving additional allowance.
Looking at my breakdown tells you that you check if the vehicle moved flat out in that movement phase. (That can only mean the current turns movement phase) if it has, then you are forbidden from disembarking.


Also you can not use the assault vehicle rule if your transport is destroyed:

Q: Do any upgrades or special rules a vehicle has cease
to work once it is destroyed? (p61)
A: Yes. For example if a Land Raider Crusader is
destroyed by ramming an enemy vehicle, its embarked
passengers would not be able to launch an assault in
the ensuing Assault phase as they would no longer
benefit from its Assault Vehicle special rule.

So you can not assault.

Seattle: The wording change in the FAQ did not change the rules; it changed the scope of the question.

The question itself now only deals with destroyed-in-movement-phase results, the rules on embarkation/disembarkation are in whole.

If i tell my 6 year old that he is not allowed to watch television and he then asks me if he is allowed to watch Sponge-bob; that does not mean he is going to be allowed to watch johnny Test, nor Phineas and Ferb after I tell him no Sponge-bob.

BRB page 70, Fast transport Vehicles wrote:Passengers may not embark onto or disembark from a fast vehicle if it has moved(or is going to move) flat out in that Movement phase.

Ok lets break this rule down; it is a removal of permission granted from earlier rules under certain situations.
What are those situations?
If the vehicle has moved, or is going to move flat out that movement phase.
Which movement phase?
"That" one would mean this turn's.
So the Check for denial of embarkation/disembarkation is if, during this turn's movement phase, the vehicle either did actually move, or was going to move flat-out.

Skies of Blood/Grav-chute insertion/shadow skies can be "tapped" as an available disembarkation after having moved flat-out in this turn's movement phase because it has past-tense wording(with Shadow Skies having the clearest wording letting us know that it is anytime after the stormraven had moved flat out).

A "destoyed-explodes" result on any flat-out transport will allow for the survival of the unit; because the unit does not disembark, it is placed.

DeathReaper wrote:The BRB says they can not disembark without giving additional allowance.
Looking at my breakdown tells you that you check if the vehicle moved flat out in that movement phase. (That can only mean the current turns movement phase) if it has, then you are forbidden from disembarking.


Also you can not use the assault vehicle rule if your transport is destroyed:

Q: Do any upgrades or special rules a vehicle has cease
to work once it is destroyed? (p61)
A: Yes. For example if a Land Raider Crusader is
destroyed by ramming an enemy vehicle, its embarked
passengers would not be able to launch an assault in
the ensuing Assault phase as they would no longer
benefit from its Assault Vehicle special rule.

So you can not assault.

Aha, I did not see that in the FAQ (That thing is extremely large now). I agree, with the FAQ, they definitely could not assault.

However, they could still disembark, as the vehicle was not destroyed in the movement phase. The BRB as well as the FAQ both only specify the movement phase as part of the "May not disembark" clause. There is no reason to believe that it applies to any other phase during your turn.

Rephistorch wrote:However, they could still disembark, as the vehicle was not destroyed in the movement phase. The BRB as well as the FAQ both only specify the movement phase as part of the "May not disembark" clause. There is no reason to believe that it applies to any other phase during your turn.

No, they can not disembark, as they are forbidden from disembarking.

You check if the vehicle moved flat out in that movement phase. (That can only mean the current turns movement phase) if it has, then you are forbidden from disembarking.

It says you can not disembark IF the vehicle moved flat out in that movement phase. (That can only mean the current turn)

So We have to ask a question: Did the vehicle move flat out in that movement phase?

If the answer is yes, then you can not disembark.

DeathReaper wrote:

Rephistorch wrote:However, they could still disembark, as the vehicle was not destroyed in the movement phase. The BRB as well as the FAQ both only specify the movement phase as part of the "May not disembark" clause. There is no reason to believe that it applies to any other phase during your turn.

It says you can not disembark IF the vehicle moved flat out in that movement phase. (That can only mean the current turn)

This is where your argument is wrong. You can't make that leap, because it means the movement phase. It does not say or mean 'turn', and they have updated the FAQ to reflect this. You can normally only voluntarily disembark during the movement phase, therefore it is logical that you only lose the models if it is destroyed in the movement phase. Perhaps a rephrasing of the original sentence could help.

Original:
Passengers may not embark or disembark from a fast vehicle if it has moved (Or is going to move) flat out in that movement phase.

Rephrased:
In the movement phase that a fast vehicle has moved (Or is going to move), passengers may not embark or disembark.

your rephrase is incorrect because it does not restrict you to disembarking only to the movement phase.

The rephrase should be like this:

If a fast transport vehicle has moved (Or is going to move) flat out in the movement phase, then Passengers may not disembark.

The Original says nothing about disembarking In the movement phase.

It only mentions the fast vehicle moving in the movement phase.

To read it how you rephrased it, it would have to have looked like this:

Original:
Passengers may not embark or disembark from a fast vehicle, if it has moved (Or is going to move) flat out, in that movement phase.

Instead the sentence is this:
Original:
Passengers may not embark or disembark from a fast vehicle if it has moved (Or is going to move) flat out in that movement phase.

Notice how the commas in the first one change the meaning and make it read how you have said.

Where the second one, without the commas, makes it read like I have laid out.

DeathReaper wrote:your rephrase is incorrect because it does not restrict you to disembarking only to the movement phase.

The rephrase should be like this:

If a fast transport vehicle has moved (Or is going to move) flat out in the movement phase, then Passengers may not disembark.

The Original says nothing about disembarking In the movement phase.

It only mentions the fast vehicle moving in the movement phase.

To read it how you rephrased it, it would have to have looked like this:

Original:
Passengers may not embark or disembark from a fast vehicle, if it has moved (Or is going to move) flat out, in that movement phase.

Instead the sentence is this:
Original:
Passengers may not embark or disembark from a fast vehicle if it has moved (Or is going to move) flat out in that movement phase.

Notice how the commas in the first one change the meaning and make it read how you have said.

Where the second one, without the commas, makes it read like I have laid out.

This is where it says it: Passengers may not embark or disembark ... in that movement phase.

The word "that" is telling.

The clause "in that movement phase" relates to the vehicle having moved Flat Out

It is NOT the time you are restricted from disembarking.

nosferatu1001 wrote:The clause "in that movement phase" relates to the vehicle having moved Flat Out

It is NOT the time you are restricted from disembarking.

It's both. You may not disembark in the same (that) movement phase.

No, it is not. That requires you to rewrite the sentence

You may not disembark IF (the vehicle moved flatout in that movement phase)

Except there are no parenthesis, so the "That" is referring to the current movement phase in both regards.

If they really didn't want you to disembark the whole turn, they would have wrote it differently:

Passengers may not embark or disembark from a fast vehicle if it has moved (Or is going to move) flat out in (its|your) movement phase.
-or, more clearly-
Passengers may not embark or disembark from a fast vehicle in a turn that it has moved (Or is going to move) flat out.

In the BRB, "in that movement phase" modifies "if it has moved (Or is going to move) flat out".

The parentheses in Nos' post were just him parsing the sentence to point it out.

Mannahnin wrote:In the BRB, "in that movement phase" modifies "if it has moved (Or is going to move) flat out".

The parentheses in Nos' post were just him parsing the sentence to point it out.

But why use the word "That"? They could have used, "the", "your", "its" and it would mean something different.

It's because you can normally only disembark in the movement phase, and you can not disembark in THAT movement phase if the vehicle moves flat out.

"that' parses perfectly well to modify THAT movement phases movement - that of going flat out.

It does NOT modify both the restriction on disembarking and the speed the vehicle moved; it ONLY relates to the vehicle movement

It does parse perfectly, You can not disembark if your transport moves flat out in THAT movement phase.

In THAT movement phase, if your transport moves flat out, You can not disembark.

If your transport moves flat out in THAT movement phase, you may not disembark.

These are all equivalent, and they all mean that the movement of your troops in the movement phase is restricted by the movement of your transport in that moving phase.

No, they are not equivalent. You are having an English grammar issue here.

Mannahnin wrote:No, they are not equivalent. You are having an English grammar issue here.

In what way are they not equivalent?

Placing the clauses in the order they appear in the text, makes one the antecedent of the other, as I noted two posts ago. You are rearranging the text in ways which are not semantically equivalent.

Mannahnin wrote:Placing the clauses in the order they appear in the text, makes one the antecedent of the other, as I noted two posts ago. You are rearranging the text in ways which are not semantically equivalent.

Actually, in all of the sentences the Antecedent and Anaphor are all the same. The addition of commas to the sentences tells you which is which.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
At any rate, no one can show where this sentence says that they can no longer disembark for the entire turn. In fact, if you ignore the implication of it being for just the movement phase, the unit can never disembark after moving flat out.

When can a unit not disembark? In that movement phase in which a vehicle has moved flat out. In THAT movement phase.

If it said, "In the turn in which a vehicle moves flat out", this would be a different implication.

No, you're incorrect. As has been stated, you're having a grammar issue.

The phrase "that movement phase" is attached to "the vehicle moved Flat Out". It is NOT attached to "passengers may not disembark", in any way.

Again, assuming that is the case (which it is not), where does it say, specifically, how long the effect lasts? Because if you don't think it's the movement phase, why can you ever disembark again?

Rephistorch wrote:Again, assuming that is the case (which it is not), where does it say, specifically, how long the effect lasts? Because if you don't think it's the movement phase, why can you ever disembark again?

Because it says "that" Movement phase. If another Movement phase has begun in between the time when you move flat-out and the time you want to disembark, then "that" Movement phase is no longer relevant, because you're in a different turn, with a different Movement phase.

It says specifically how long the effect lasts right here.

BGB page 70 wrote:Passengers may not embark onto or disembark from a fast vehicle if it has moved (or is going to move) flat-out in that movement phase.

There is no limiter in that sentence, whatsoever, except the phrase "that movement phase". That sentence, therefore, tells us that the restriction applies until "that movement phase" is no longer the Movement phase in which the vehicle moved flat-out; which doesn't occur until a NEW Movement phase begins, ie the beginning of the next turn.

Wow, you are SO close to having it right. You even brought up some of my own arguments that I used a few posts ago. If this doesn't work, I don't know if you'll ever agree with me.

BeRzErKeR wrote:
Because it says "that" Movement phase. If another Movement phase has begun in between the time when you move flat-out and the time you want to disembark, then "that" Movement phase is no longer relevant, because you're in a different turn, with a different Movement phase.

It says specifically how long the effect lasts right here.

There is no limiter in that sentence, whatsoever, except the phrase "that movement phase". That sentence, therefore, tells us that the restriction applies until "that movement phase" is no longer the Movement phase in which the vehicle moved flat-out; which doesn't occur until a NEW Movement phase begins, ie the beginning of the next turn.

Because it says "that" movement phase. If it is a different phase (say shooting), "that" movement phase is no longer relevant.

It says specifically how long the effect lasts right here.

There is no limiter in that sentence, whatsoever, except the phrase "that movement phase". That sentence, therefore, tells us that the restriction applies until "that movement phase" is no longer the active phase. Which occurs as soon as it isn't THAT movement phase any longer.

That movement phase is only a modifier letting you know when the vehicle has to have moved flat out.

It does not disallow disembarking to only that movement phase.

That movement phase refers to the phase in which the vehicle moved flat out. Not to the period in which the unit is unable to disembark.

Why would you think that a unit which is unable to disembark in the movement phase, and is killed if forced to try, would somehow be safe if shot down in that same turn?

Mannahnin wrote:Why would you think that a unit which is unable to disembark in the movement phase, and is killed if forced to try disembarking in that movement phase, would somehow be safe if shot down in that same turn?

Fixed that for you.

The reason? It's no longer the movement phase.

Again, I pose the question, where does it tell you, specifically, that it applies to your whole turn, and not just to the movement phase? DeathReaper, and you have repeatedly failed to provide an exact, specific quote from the BRB or FAQ to prove your point.

If GW agreed with you, they would not have changed the FAQ to what it is now, and they would have left the issue alone.

My questions for the people who say you can't disembark in the shooting phase are:

1) How long does the restriction last on not being able to disembark?

2) Why?

Rephistorch wrote: DeathReaper, and you have repeatedly failed to provide an exact, specific quote from the BRB or FAQ to prove your point.

I have provided the BRB quote, but I will do it again.

Page 70 in the BRB under 'Fast Transport Vehicles'

"Passengers may not embark or disembark from a fast vehicle if it has moved (Or is going to move) flat out in that movement phase."

This sentence is a simple If/Then statement.

It gives us the rule: Passengers may not embark or disembark

adds a clause to that rule: from a fast vehicle

gives us condition about the rule: if it (This refers to the aforementioned fast vehicle) has moved (Or is going to move) flat out in that movement phase.

In that movement phase refers to "If aforementioned fast vehicle has moved flat out"

The above is the correct English reading of the aforementioned sentence.

Unit1126PLL wrote:My questions for the people who say you can't disembark in the shooting phase are:

1) How long does the restriction last on not being able to disembark?

2) Why?

1) Until the next movement phase.

2) Because they give a restriction and tell you a condition the restriction being: Passengers may not disembark. It lasts until the next movement phase because of the clause: if it has moved flat out in that movement phase. So you have to check if the vehicle has moved flat out in that movement phase, which can only be referring to the current player turn.

Deathreaper: So where in the sentence you just quoted does it say that the effect of not being able to disembark ends at the end of your player turn? Can we not assume that since the enemy movement phase that follows your player turn does not permit you to move the vehicle, so in its movement phase it has still moved flat out, that in the subsequent enemy movement/shooting/assault phase it would still be considered to have moved flat out, therefore the passengers could still not disembark? By your rational (since it never specifically says that the ban on disembarking is lifted at the end of your player turn), isn't it correct that until the vehicle has another opportunity to 'not move flat out' that it is still considered to have moved flat out? And because of that then the passengers cannot disembark until they are in a vehicle that is considered to have not moved flat out?

Maybe you missed my last part of the post, because I answered the question in an edit.

Look at the last part of my last post, it breaks down why it lasts until the next movement phase.

There is a question we need to ask to see if the fast vehicle is still under restriction, that question is: has the transport in question moved flat out in that movement phase?

If yes, then: Passengers may not disembark

If no, then: Passengers may disembark

DeathReaper wrote:
2) Because they give a restriction and tell you a condition the restriction being: Passengers may not disembark. It lasts until the next movement phase because of the clause: if it has moved flat out in that movement phase. So you have to check if the vehicle has moved flat out in that movement phase, which can only be referring to the current player turn.

The bolded part there doesn't make any sense. "It lasts until the next movement phase because of the clause: it has moved flat out in that movement phase." What? "It has moved flat out in that movement phase" is not a reason "it lasts until the next movement phase."

And how do you stretch "That movement phase" out into "Current player turn" there in the underlined part?

has the transport in question moved flat out in that movement phase?

If yes, then: Passengers may not disembark

If no, then: Passengers may disembark

Simple as that, this shows it lasts til the next movement phase.

DeathReaper wrote:has the transport in question moved flat out in that movement phase?

If yes, then: Passengers may not disembark

If no, then: Passengers may disembark

Simple as that, this shows it lasts til the next movement phase.

It shows no such thing - what it shows is that passengers my not disembark in the movement phase in which the transport has moved flat out.

As previously proven, your position is incorrect.

It is a simple If then Statement.

The rule says nothing about disembarking In the movement phase.

It only mentions the fast vehicle moving in the movement phase.

As Nos said:
The clause "in that movement phase" relates to the vehicle having moved Flat Out

It is NOT the time you are restricted from disembarking.

I'm sorry Death Reaper, but you are making way too many assumptions in your version.
look at the first line of the FAQ

If a transport vehicle is destroyed in a Movement
phase in which it has moved flat out

That describes what and when the ruling applies.
the vehicle has to have been BOTH destroyed and moved flat out in a single movement phase.
Both things have to happen for the embarked unit to be removed.
'is destroyed in a Movement phase'
and
' a Movement phase in which it has moved flat out'
This is simple grammer folks, you guys are usally better at parsing this stuff, I'm a bit disappointed.

That faq entry is irrelevant for this discussion. The vehicle was not destroyed in the movement phase. Therefore, you must ignore the answer provided since it does not reference this situation. That is in no way an allowance to state that the inverse is true. That is to say that implies is only one way. If I have 3 oranges then I have 5 apples does not grant permission to assume if I have 5 apples then I have 3 oranges. It is merely a clarification, not a statement of absolute fact.

That means you fall back to what the core rules say, which is you cannot disembark from a vehicle that has, or is going to move flat out.

Specifically, the only applicable rule is:
"Passengers may not embark onto or disembark from a
fast vehicle if it has moved (or is going to move) flat
out in that Movement phase."

In this case the pronoun it is an obvious reference to the vehicle, so it can be reworded as such:
"Passengers may not embark onto or disembark from a fast vehicle if [the fast vehicle] has moved (or is going to move) flat out in that movement phase."

This can then be further reworded to:
"If [the fast vehicle] has moved (or is going to move) flat out in that movement phase, Passengers may not embark onto or disembark [the fast vehicle]."

The only end condition given is "that movement phase" which is a reference to the last movement phase the vehicle has taken. Once the vehicle is taking a different movement phase, the above clause ceases to apply. Simple as that.

The vehicle moved flat out in that player's movement phase, you may not disembark. Wreck/Destroyed results force you to disembark with the provision of if its impossible the models are lost. QED.

edit:
Also worth pointing out that the vehicle gets its cover save solely from the fact that it moved flat out, so RAI it's obvious that it is still "moving" in his shooting phase. Just saying.

WanderingFox wrote:That faq entry is irrelevant for this discussion.

This is accurate, that FaQ does not have any bearing on the discussion we are having.

The wording of the rule makes it clear that (if it has moved) it is talking about if the Fast Vehicle has moved, and nothing else.

SeattleDV8 wrote:I'm sorry Death Reaper, but you are making way too many assumptions in your version.
look at the first line of the FAQ

If a transport vehicle is destroyed in a Movement
phase in which it has moved flat out

That describes what and when the ruling applies.
the vehicle has to have been BOTH destroyed and moved flat out in a single movement phase.
Both things have to happen for the embarked unit to be removed.
'is destroyed in a Movement phase'
and
' a Movement phase in which it has moved flat out'
This is simple grammer folks, you guys are usally better at parsing this stuff, I'm a bit disappointed.

You cannot use the FAQ answer in this situation, because this is not the movement phase the vehicle moved flat out in

So you go back to the BRB rule, and ask "did the vehicle movement flat out in "that" movement phase?" - if the answer is yes, you still cannot disembark

When you get to the opponents turn you again can ask the question - did it move flat out in that movement phase? No. Therefore I can disembark

The FAQ answered changed because a number of people still dont seem to understand that turn == player turn, and that was causing issues (ToS had a few people getting this wrong, and this is really visible to the studio) with people not being able to disembark if their opponent blew them up.

If you parse the sentence from the BRB correctly, "that movement phase" is a restriction on the vehicle speed and when it moved, NOT on when you can disembark

The FAQ is very relevant.
It makes clear when the prohibition on disembarking (voluntary and involuntary) is and what happens when you are forced to.

This has changed, use a bit of logic.
The old FAQ that stopped disembarking ffor the turn was well written and easy to understand, ( the player turn/game turn issue aside)
Why in the world would they change it to say the same thing , only with some major assumptions and mental gymnastics to decypher?
They wouldn't, they have changed the ruling to better fit with the BRB.
The embarked unit is only removed if the vehicle has been moving flat out and is destroyed in the same movement phase.

it's not symmetric... A little bit of logic would be nice...

Logical implies: If a then b. This means that if a is true then b is true. It does not go back the other way.

Let's just abstract this to make my point clear:

FAQ question says:
If I have a bunch of planes, can they move like helicopters?

Answer: No.

Does this say anything about helicopters being able to move like planes, it only affirms the fact that planes cannot move like helicopters.

All squares are rectangles, but not all rectangles are squares.


You are using a FAQ that answers a very specific question (it was indeed specifically changed to answer a specific question) to answer a more general question.

All that FAQ entry does is add that restriction to the rules. If it was destroyed in the movement phase then they unit is destroyed.

It was not destroyed in the movement phase, so basic logical evaluation tells us that you ignore the result condition of that clause.

Therefore, the only governing logic for this situation is the original rulings, which fairly clearly state that the unit is lost because it is unable to disembark.


So, before I leave this thread to the cyclical masses... I challenge you to provide one counter-example. Be it a rules quote (outside of the already established irreverent FAQ entry) or cited example from an official source that backs up your claim. So far as I've read in this thread, you've yet to do this, which leaves you very little to stand on in terms of rules backing...

Here's how I see this:

DR and those like-minded see the only phase referred to is "that" movement phase. They then extrapolate that for the rest of "that" turn, any attempt at disembarkation (outside of certain special rules) will result in the destruction of the unit. This means that the (admittedly rather silly) tactic of shooting your own vehicle for effect cannot be used.

I think that those in line with my thinking recognize that while "that" movement phase indeed applies to "that" turn, "that" turn will always have happened. ANY disembarkation from the vehicle will then be prohibited (again, excluding special rules), no matter which turn it is, because in "that" movement phase (let's say it was top of turn 1) will still have been "that" movement phase relative to any of the following turns or phases. This means that if the unit ever tries to disembark for the rest of the game without using special rules, it will be destroyed. While this is a valid interpretation, it is not sound (at least to me). Therefore I posit that the rule refers to "that" movement phase and only "that" movement phase, so the previous (and rather excessively strict) interpretation is eliminated.

Oh, and an example for WanderingFox:
Q: Am I able to gain the benefits of any of my opponent’s wargear or special rules, such as Teleport Homers, Chaos Icons, Tyranid Synapse, Necron Resurrection Orbs etc?
A: In most occasions this is clear, as the rules use the words ‘friendly’ or ‘own’ to indicate your units, and ‘enemy’ for the opponent’s. On the other hand, some rules clearly specify that they affect ‘friend and foe’. A few rules are, however, slightly ambiguous as they don’t clearly specify this distinction. As a general principle, we recommend that you cannot use or gain the benefits from any of the wargear or special rules of your opponent’s army, unless specifically stated in the rule itself (‘friend or foe’) or in an official FAQ.

(Not that I agree with SeattleDV8's statement. Rather, I disagree with yours that FAQ rulings cannot go from specific --> general. If that's not what you meant, I apologize for misinterpreting you.)

Not sure what that faq entry has to do with anything. It is a clarification, just as the one in question is. The difference is that the one you quote is generalized. It does not specify a specific situation.

Also, you misinterpreted the argument.

"that" movement phase is a marker stating a moment in time in which the check is referencing. That is to say it means that you may not embark or disembark on a transport that moved flat out in its last movement phase (until its next movement phase due to the phrasing of 'that').

The timing of the rule is initiated at the movement phase, yes. However, it provides no end-condition. That is to say, it always references the movement phase in which it moved flat out.

The extrapolation you reference is not an implication, it doesn't even exist.

You shoot the transport down. Did it move flat-out in that movement phase? (that being a reference to its last movement phase as described above). The answer is obviously yes. You then move on to the result clause of the condition, which clearly states you may not embark or disembark. Ergo, you may not disembark from a wreck/destroy result... therefore models lost.

Do keep in mind that 40k is a permissive ruleset, you must be given explicit permission to do something, otherwise it is assumed that you may not. That said, while wreck/destroy give you permission to disembark. They only do so 'if able' moving flat-out plainly denies any embark-disembark.

Obviously the question there becomes what is the end condition? This, I will admit, is slightly vague and could possibly be twisted around to mean a few things (as obviously seen in this thread), but for the most part one can assume due to the wording of the rules that the restriction lasts until it next moves.

That said, from a RAI stand point, how is it getting a cover save in the ENEMY'S shooting phase while simultaneously moving slow enough to allow for a disembark. That simply breaks continuity.

And with that I'm out

But that's just it, if you want to say it ends in the next movement phase, and I say it ends in this movement phase, what is the deciding factor? It seems like my opinion vs yours.

I can make the same argument you just made for my position. You see what I mean?

Except it isnt a matter of opinion; ""That" movement phase is explicit as a condition for determining if the skimmer moved flat out during the turn or not.

During turn 1, opponents turn, you have not moved flat out that movement phase, so may disembark.

You have moved flat out in A movement phase, not THAT movement phase

Why do you assume "that" refers to turn?

If you work in the us, you have to file taxes for that year.
So if you work in 2011 you file based on that year, not 2010 or 2012.

You cannot disembark if you went flat out in that movement phase.
So if you're in the assault phase of turn 3, which movement phase is "that" phase?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Kitzz wrote:Why do you assume "that" refers to turn?

Sentence structure.

Kitzz wrote:Why do you assume "that" refers to turn?

I'm not, I'm deducing that it refers to that turns movement phase, due to context and sentence structure

Youre parsing the sentence incorrectly if you tie "that movement phase" to the restriction on disembarking

rigeld2 wrote:If you work in the us, you have to file taxes for that year.
So if you work in 2011 you file based on that year, not 2010 or 2012.

You cannot disembark if you went flat out in that movement phase.
So if you're in the assault phase of turn 3, which movement phase is "that" phase?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Kitzz wrote:Why do you assume "that" refers to turn?

Sentence structure.

It's actually more like filing quarterly taxes if you are self employed. Where each quarter is a phase, each year is a turn, taxes are disembarkation of funds, and the amount of profit/loss from your business is variable.

If your profits are less than your losses in that quarter, you don't pay taxes.

Now, it would be absurd to assume that you don't pay ANY quarterly taxes that year, just because in the first quarter you didn't have a net profit. Unfortunately, taxes are never going to be a perfect example, because you can get profit/loss each quarter, or each year, etc.

However, here's the way it goes:

Embarking/Disembarking:
Units may embark or disembark in the movement phase (Permission to disembark in the movement phase)

Shooting Vehicles:
A transport vehicle that explodes or is destroyed, has its troops dumped out of it (Permission to disembark WHENEVER a vehicle is destroyed)

Now, what this rule is stating, is that if a fast vehicle moves flat out in THAT movement phase, troops may not disembark. Troops are only given permission to voluntarily disembark during THAT movement phase, so the rule is restricting you from voluntarily disembarking.

This rule removes the allowance granted in the embarking/disembarking section of the transport rules, as you are no longer able to disembark in THAT movement phase.
It does not remove any other permissions, because the movement phase is the only phase mentioned in the rule.



At any rate, DR, you have failed to show where in the BRB it says that the effect lasts for the whole turn. You point and flail wildly at the sentence that says "in THAT movement phase" without any other qualifier and insist that means the whole turn. This logical jump is not sound.

I've said it once, and I'll say it again, if they wanted it to last the whole turn they would have written, "in that turn's movement phase". As it stands now, you are missing the word "turn", so it does not last a whole turn. The only length of time one can assume it lasts without adding any logical jumps, is in that movement phase when the vehicle moves.

Until anyone can show where "turn" comes from (and no, it can not be inferred, because there are no sentences before or after it in the same section that mention turn), the point has not been proven.

IF (the rulebook does not say turn)
THEN it must not mean turn.

It has been deduced from parsing the sentence correctly.

Rephistorch wrote:Until anyone can show where "turn" comes from (and no, it can not be inferred, because there are no sentences before or after it in the same section that mention turn), the point has not been proven.

IF (the rulebook does not say turn)
THEN it must not mean turn.

False statement.

You're in the shooting phase and must disembark. You check for permission. The rules state that you cannot disembark if you moved flat-out in that movement phase.

"that movement phase" must, in that case, refer to the movement phase of the current turn. It cannot refer to anything else.

rigeld2 wrote:

Rephistorch wrote:Until anyone can show where "turn" comes from (and no, it can not be inferred, because there are no sentences before or after it in the same section that mention turn), the point has not been proven.

IF (the rulebook does not say turn)
THEN it must not mean turn.

False statement.

You're in the shooting phase and must disembark. You check for permission. The rules state that you cannot disembark if you moved flat-out in that movement phase.

"that movement phase" must, in that case, refer to the movement phase of the current turn. It cannot refer to anything else.

You skipped the part that, while checking for permission, it is no longer THAT movement phase and has moved on to something totally unrelated.


EDIT: Nos, I defer to your grammar skills, and I may have missed a post earlier. Can you demonstrate how to parse the sentence for me? Like you always do with parenthesis and stuff?

You are both disagreeing about interpretation, not text.
Reading it as either referencing the movement phase flat-out was used - which is to say you when flat out that movement phase, not the one from the first turn.

Or reading it as flat out in that phase, that is movement - which is to say the current phase flat-out is used, which has to be movement phase.

I think.

kirsanth wrote:You are both disagreeing about interpretation, not text.
Reading it as either referencing the movement phase flat-out was used - which is to say you when flat out that movement phase, not the one from the first turn.

Or reading it as flat out in that phase, that is movement - which is to say the current phase flat-out is used, which has to be movement phase.

I think.

Yes - I believe that is the point that we disagree on. I'm with the first reading, and I don't see the second as a valid way to read the sentence.

rigeld2 wrote:
Yes - I believe that is the point that we disagree on. I'm with the first reading, and I don't see the second as a valid way to read the sentence.

Why not?

Unit1126PLL wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:
Yes - I believe that is the point that we disagree on. I'm with the first reading, and I don't see the second as a valid way to read the sentence.

Why not?

Because sentence structure/basic English tells us that the second is not a valid way to read the sentence.

Unit - but the question is "did the skimmer .... in that movement phase?" - to which the answer for that turn is YES

The sentence is parsed such that the whole "if...." could be included, logically, inside a parenthesis; it is the condition that must be met within the IF statement, it is not a requirement on the whole sentence

The BRB refers to your movement phase only, because it is talking about voluntarily disembarking, which can only ever be done in your movement phase.

If you move flat out and get shot down in your opponents phase, you do not lose the unit, you just emergency disembark.

This how it's been played in every tournament I've ever been aware of, I honestly am shocked this debate has lasted 4 pages.

Flat out would suck beyond comprehension if perma killed the occupants if the transport got shot down. It's very common for venom spam armies for instance to move flat-out on the first turn, this tactic would suck horribly if it risked the occupants lives.

nosferatu1001 wrote:Unit - but the question is "did the skimmer .... in that movement phase?" - to which the answer for that turn is YES

The sentence is parsed such that the whole "if...." could be included, logically, inside a parenthesis; it is the condition that must be met within the IF statement, it is not a requirement on the whole sentence

Ok, I see that. It's still a point of contention for me that it's flat WRONG to interpret it the other way, but I concede my point.

It's flat wrong because nothing about the sentence allows you to place braces around the "if..." to put "that movement phase" as applying to the whole sentence.

nosferatu1001 wrote:It's flat wrong because nothing about the sentence allows you to place braces around the "if..." to put "that movement phase" as applying to the whole sentence.

But it's not flat wrong, because there's nothing in the sentence that allows the effect to last the whole turn.

Your logical condition can be "did the skimmer move flat out ... in THAT movement phase" meaning the movement phase in which you are attempting to voluntarily disembark?

The answer is no, because you are not voluntarily disembarking, and it's not the movement phase.

It is valid to read the sentence this way, because there is absolutely no qualifier saying that it lasts for the whole turn.

ShadarLogoth wrote:The BRB refers to your movement phase only, because it is talking about voluntarily disembarking, which can only ever be done in your movement phase.

If you move flat out and get shot down in your opponents phase, you do not lose the unit, you just emergency disembark.

This how it's been played in every tournament I've ever been aware of, I honestly am shocked this debate has lasted 4 pages.

Flat out would suck beyond comprehension if perma killed the occupants if the transport got shot down. It's very common for venom spam armies for instance to move flat-out on the first turn, this tactic would suck horribly if it risked the occupants lives.

This is exactly correct. However, it isn't the question under discussion.

What we're discussing is whether the passengers die if the transport is shot down in YOUR Shooting phase; that is, if you for some reason shoot at your own vehicle on the same turn it has moved Flat Out.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Rephistorch wrote:

But it's not flat wrong, because there's nothing in the sentence that allows the effect to last the whole turn.

Your logical condition can be "did the skimmer move flat out ... in THAT movement phase" meaning the movement phase in which you are attempting to voluntarily disembark?

The answer is no, because you are not voluntarily disembarking, and it's not the movement phase.

It is valid to read the sentence this way, because there is absolutely no qualifier saying that it lasts for the whole turn.

But it doesn't say 'voluntarily disembark'. It just says 'disembark'. If the BGB was referring to voluntary disembarkation alone, there would be no argument; you would ALWAYS be allowed to perform an Emergency Disembarkation, because it isn't voluntary. But the BGB doesn't say that, so the question of whether the disembarkation is voluntary or not is irrelevant.

It is possible to disembark in phases other than the Movement phase. However, grammatically speaking, if a situation where you must disembark arises in the same turn as the transport moved Flat-Out, you are not allowed to do so. Please note that at this point, the FAQ has not been referred to, because so far it's irrelevant. We're not talking about a Movement phase, and the FAQ only deals with a Movement phase.

AFTER we have determined that we're not allowed to disembark, we then ask what happens to the unit. It can't be in the vehicle because the vehicle is destroyed; it can't disembark, because it's not allowed to. There's no explicit answer, so we look for precedent. The FAQ gives us precedent; in a very similar situation, when unable to disembark, the unit is destroyed. Therefore, we destroy the unit.

Reph - if you attempt to disembark in the shooting phase, and the skimmer moved flat out in THAT movement phase [of the turn] then you may not disembark

Nos, you're usually right about things, but in this case, I think you're being a bit ott. Both parsings are valid ways to interpret the rule. One is not "flat wrong" or "flat right." To assume that your interpretation is better simply because it appeals to your preferred parsing of the language is unnecessary and fallacious.

This is one where I agree to disagree. Both sides have valid arguments. I could see GW supporting either interpretation.

I'm not disagreeing with your interpretation, I'm disagreeing with your attitude about the interpretation.

BeRzErKeR wrote:

ShadarLogoth wrote:The BRB refers to your movement phase only, because it is talking about voluntarily disembarking, which can only ever be done in your movement phase.

If you move flat out and get shot down in your opponents phase, you do not lose the unit, you just emergency disembark.

This how it's been played in every tournament I've ever been aware of, I honestly am shocked this debate has lasted 4 pages.

Flat out would suck beyond comprehension if perma killed the occupants if the transport got shot down. It's very common for venom spam armies for instance to move flat-out on the first turn, this tactic would suck horribly if it risked the occupants lives.

This is exactly correct. However, it isn't the question under discussion.

What we're discussing is whether the passengers die if the transport is shot down in YOUR Shooting phase; that is, if you for some reason shoot at your own vehicle on the same turn it has moved Flat Out.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Rephistorch wrote:

But it's not flat wrong, because there's nothing in the sentence that allows the effect to last the whole turn.

Your logical condition can be "did the skimmer move flat out ... in THAT movement phase" meaning the movement phase in which you are attempting to voluntarily disembark?

The answer is no, because you are not voluntarily disembarking, and it's not the movement phase.

It is valid to read the sentence this way, because there is absolutely no qualifier saying that it lasts for the whole turn.

But it doesn't say 'voluntarily disembark'. It just says 'disembark'. If the BGB was referring to voluntary disembarkation alone, there would be no argument; you would ALWAYS be allowed to perform an Emergency Disembarkation, because it isn't voluntary. But the BGB doesn't say that, so the question of whether the disembarkation is voluntary or not is irrelevant.

It is possible to disembark in phases other than the Movement phase. However, grammatically speaking, if a situation where you must disembark arises in the same turn as the transport moved Flat-Out, you are not allowed to do so. Please note that at this point, the FAQ has not been referred to, because so far it's irrelevant. We're not talking about a Movement phase, and the FAQ only deals with a Movement phase.

AFTER we have determined that we're not allowed to disembark, we then ask what happens to the unit. It can't be in the vehicle because the vehicle is destroyed; it can't disembark, because it's not allowed to. There's no explicit answer, so we look for precedent. The FAQ gives us precedent; in a very similar situation, when unable to disembark, the unit is destroyed. Therefore, we destroy the unit.

Just to correct a minor mistake, you can perform an emergency disembarkation even if you are not forced to disembark. Any time you want to disembark, but your exits are blocked by either impassable terrain or enemy units, you can attempt an emergency disembarkation.

nosferatu1001 wrote:Reph - if you attempt to disembark in the shooting phase, and the skimmer moved flat out in THAT movement phase [of the turn] then you may not disembark

That's the problem. You're adding [of the turn]. You really should be saying "in THAT movement phase" period. Is it that movement phase (the phase itself) anymore? No - then you may disembark.

Here are a several different ways to interpret this sentence. I can understand where the first 2 or 3 stances are coming from, however, I believe the first one to be most correct.
1. if the fast transport vehicle moves flat out in that movement phase (in which you want or need to disembark), units inside may not disembark.
2. if the fast transport vehicle moves flat out in that [turn's] movement phase (in which you want or need to disembark), units inside may not disembark.
3. if the fast transport vehicle moves flat out in that [game turn's] movement phase (in which you want or need to disembark), units inside may not disembark.
4. if the fast transport vehicle moves flat out in that [game's first] movement phase (in which you want or need to disembark), units inside may not disembark.
5. if the fast transport vehicle moves flat out in that [game's last] movement phase (in which you want or need to disembark), units inside may not disembark.
6. if the fast transport vehicle moves flat out in that [anything you want here] movement phase (in which you want or need to disembark), units inside may not disembark.

The rules do not tell us to add further qualifiers (turn, game turn), therefore we must look to what it says, which is "in that movement phase". Adding any other modifiers, whatsoever, is not following what is written.

Again I pose the question, if it's not limited to your movement phase, why is it limited to your player turn? Why isn't it limited to your whole game turn? The most logical reading of this sentence is to take what is written and not add any additional qualifiers.

Because once you get round to a new turn you have a new movement phase.

Who's new turn? Yours? Your Opponents?

Once you get to a new phase, it's no longer "that" movement phase.

Also, congrats on the 16000th post!

Rephistorch wrote:Who's new turn? Yours? Your Opponents?

Once you get to a new phase, it's no longer "that" movement phase.

No, but "that movement phase" still refers to the most recent one.

"Passengers may not embark or disembark from a fast vehicle if it has moved (Or is going to move) flat out in that movement phase."

The sentence could be worded like this and have the exact same meaning as it does now:

if a fast vehicle has moved (Or is going to move) flat out in the movement phase then Passengers may not embark or disembark.

Ouch, 16000......

Youre not asking if it is THAT movement phase, but whether the SKIMMER moved in that movement phase.

Rephistorch wrote:
Just to correct a minor mistake, you can perform an emergency disembarkation even if you are not forced to disembark. Any time you want to disembark, but your exits are blocked by either impassable terrain or enemy units, you can attempt an emergency disembarkation.

Fair enough, though it doesn't have any bearing on the argument. Thanks for the correction, though!

Rephistorch wrote:
That's the problem. You're adding [of the turn]. You really should be saying "in THAT movement phase" period. Is it that movement phase (the phase itself) anymore? No - then you may disembark.

Here are a several different ways to interpret this sentence. I can understand where the first 2 or 3 stances are coming from, however, I believe the first one to be most correct.
1. if the fast transport vehicle moves flat out in that movement phase (in which you want or need to disembark), units inside may not disembark.
2. if the fast transport vehicle moves flat out in that [turn's] movement phase (in which you want or need to disembark), units inside may not disembark.
3. if the fast transport vehicle moves flat out in that [game turn's] movement phase (in which you want or need to disembark), units inside may not disembark.
4. if the fast transport vehicle moves flat out in that [game's first] movement phase (in which you want or need to disembark), units inside may not disembark.
5. if the fast transport vehicle moves flat out in that [game's last] movement phase (in which you want or need to disembark), units inside may not disembark.
6. if the fast transport vehicle moves flat out in that [anything you want here] movement phase (in which you want or need to disembark), units inside may not disembark.

The rules do not tell us to add further qualifiers (turn, game turn), therefore we must look to what it says, which is "in that movement phase". Adding any other modifiers, whatsoever, is not following what is written.

Again I pose the question, if it's not limited to your movement phase, why is it limited to your player turn? Why isn't it limited to your whole game turn? The most logical reading of this sentence is to take what is written and not add any additional qualifiers.

Except that what you're not getting is that we're not adding any qualifiers. You, rather, are removing one.

In order for what you're arguing to be correct, the sentence would have to read "in that phase", rather than "in that movement phase". By distinguishing the type of phase, the meaning of the sentence is changed.

At some time (let's leave that unspecified for now) a squad is forced to disembark from a destroyed vehicle. The player consults the rulebook to see if that's possible; he reads, " If the fast transport vehicle moves flat out in that movement phase, units inside may not disembark."

That's a check that you have to perform before disembarking. It doesn't matter when or under what conditions; you always have to ask that question, and only if the answer is 'no, it didn't' are you allowed to disembark. So the player asks himself, "Did the vehicle move Flat Out in that movement phase?"

The phrasing of the question, itself, immediately eliminates the possibility that the question is referring to 'the phase in which you must disembark'. Why? Because it specifies "that movement phase". It doesn't change according to what the current phase is. If you're forced to disembark in a Shooting phase, or an Assault phase, the question is STILL referencing "that movement phase"; and clearly, that's not the phase you're in. The question, then, is which movement phase it's referring to.

We know from the phrasing that it's talking about some singular movement phase, which means that you aren't forever blocked from disembarking if you EVER move Flat Out. Furthermore, it doesn't say 'the' movement phase (which could be interpreted as any of them), it says 'that' movement phase. What movement phase might that mean? Well, it's not really specific, so we have to look at context to figure it out. What about the earlier part of the sentence, where it references embarking? That is clearly in reference to the Movement phase of the current turn. Given that, the interpretation of "this turn's movement phase" has more support than any other.

Kind of, did the skimmer move in that movement phase in which you are trying to disembark?

My full opinion is stated a couple posts above with the different examples of how the sentence is interpreted.

The rules do not tell us to add further qualifiers (turn, game turn), therefore we must look to what it says, which is "in that movement phase". Adding any other modifiers, whatsoever, is not following what is written.

Again I pose the question, if it's not limited to your movement phase, why is it limited to your player turn? Why isn't it limited to your whole game turn? The most logical reading of this sentence is to take what is written and not add any additional qualifiers.

Rephistorch wrote:Kind of, did the skimmer move in that movement phase in which you are trying to disembark?

That cannot be the correct interpretation, for the reasons I just outlined.

BeRzErKeR wrote:That's a check that you have to perform before disembarking. It doesn't matter when or under what conditions; you always have to ask that question, and only if the answer is 'no, it didn't' are you allowed to disembark. So the player asks himself, "Did the vehicle move Flat Out in that movement phase?"

The phrasing of the question, itself, immediately eliminates the possibility that the question is referring to 'the phase in which you must disembark'. Why? Because it specifies "that movement phase". It doesn't change according to what the current phase is. If you're forced to disembark in a Shooting phase, or an Assault phase, the question is STILL referencing "that movement phase"; and clearly, that's not the phase you're in. The question, then, is which movement phase it's referring to.

The rule has to work all the time; there are no limits on which phases it applies in. That being so, it is still in effect if you're trying to in a Shooting or Assault phase. However, it specifically asks about that MOVEMENT phase. That CANNOT be the phase you're trying to disembark in, because you are not trying to disembark in ANY movement phase. But the question is still asking about a Movement phase, you can't get away from that. So. . . which MOVEMENT phase is it referring to?

Basic sentence structure...

"Passengers may not embark onto or disembark from a
fast vehicle if it has moved (or is going to move) flat
out in that Movement phase."

The first it is a reference to the vehicle, therefore what moves is the vehicle, not the embarked unit. Thus, the condition of "that movement phase" is a reference to when the vehicle moved.

The rule is phrased in the present tense, since it's primary function is to clarify that a unit may not embark or disembark from a transport that moves flat out.

However, the condition of the if statement is if the vehicle has moved in 'that' movement phase.

Think of 'that' as a computer variable. In your movement phase, it is initialized to 'stationary' Then when you move the transport flat-out it is set to 'flat-out'. It stays 'flat-out' until your next movement phase.

This exact logic can be seen in the other effects of flatting out.

For example, the assault rules:
"Fast vehicles that moved 'flat out' in the previous turn
and are not immobilised are hit on a 6 in assaults
(exactly as if moving at cruising speed)."

And shooting:
Fast vehicles moving flat out may fire no weapons.


So while you can very well chose to read the wording of the transport disembark clause however you wish, no one has yet to explain why it only counts as having moved flat out in JUST that movement phase, when moving flat out clearly affects other phases (as plainly demonstrated by the above rules).

So I'll ask again, which seems more logical, that they added a poorly worded specific exception to how flat-out works for disembarking, or that the rule was simply not worded to properly deal with this situation, and it was generally assumed that people would make the assumption that it was still considered flat-out by the rest of the rules?

In short, everyone is putting way too much thought into it. Ask your TO or roll it off if there's a problem

WanderingFox wrote:

Think of 'that' as a computer variable. In your movement phase, it is initialized to 'stationary' Then when you move the transport flat-out it is set to 'flat-out'. It stays 'flat-out' until your next movement phase.

This exact logic can be seen in the other effects of flatting out.

For example, the assault rules:
"Fast vehicles that moved 'flat out' in the previous turn
and are not immobilised are hit on a 6 in assaults
(exactly as if moving at cruising speed)."

And shooting:
Fast vehicles moving flat out may fire no weapons.


So while you can very well chose to read the wording of the transport disembark clause however you wish, no one has yet to explain why it only counts as having moved flat out in JUST that movement phase, when moving flat out clearly affects other phases (as plainly demonstrated by the above rules).

Not quite right, the word "that" is referring to the logical order of events. Movement would be your variable.

Assumptions:
Movement is a simple floating point number (usually between 0-24 for fast vehicles that are also skimmers)
Upon the beginning of YOUR movement phase movement is cleared, and reset to 0.

Alright here we go, pseudo-code for logic of all of the specified scenarios:
Assault:
if (movement > 6 && phase == assault && immobilized == false) //this line is true both in your assault phase, and your opponents
toHit = 6;
Shooting:
canShoot = (movement <= 12 && phase == shooting && turn == yours); //PotMS can still shoot with a special rule, but for vehicle shooting, this works
So, disembarking:
canDisembark = (movement <= 12 && phase == movement && turn == yours); (Least Restrictive, you can't disembark in THAT movement phase)

Your theory is
canDisembark = (movement <= 12 && turn == yours); (Restrictive, can't disembark for the whole player turn)
Another theory is
canDisembark = (movement <= 12); (most restrictive, can't disembark until movement is cleared on your own turn)

The problem is, the rules in the BRB don't tell you that disembarkation is disallowed for the player turn. It also doesn't tell you that it's disallowed for the game turn. It only tells you that it is disallowed in that movement phase when a fast transport moves flat out.

Rephistorch wrote:
The problem is, the rules in the BRB don't tell you that disembarkation is disallowed for the player turn. It also doesn't tell you that it's disallowed for the game turn. It only tells you that it is disallowed in that movement phase when a fast transport moves flat out.

The bolded line there is incorrect. What it tells is that disembarkation is disallowed, if the vehicle has moved flat-out in that movement phase.

It makes a difference, it honestly does. And you still haven't answered my question; given that the sentence literally CANNOT be referring to 'the phase in which you disembark', since it applies to ALL phases (and you can be forced to disembark in any of them) but tells you to check whether the vehicle moved flat-out in the MOVEMENT phase specifically, what tells you that you are allowed to disembark in, say, the Shooting phase of a turn in which the vehicle has moved flat-out?

^

This.

Like I believe I stated earlier... 40k is a permissive ruleset. There is no permission granted to disembark in the shooting phase when a flat-out transport is destroyed.

The only thing you're given is that you're allowed to 'if possible' You are also given a specific check that if a vehicle moves flat out in its movement phase its passengers may not disembark or embark.

Your logic hinges on the idea that the restriction only applies to the movement phase, and yet you are never told so. It only ever mentions what phase to CHECK to see if you moved flat out.

Again, your point makes no sense from a logical (albeit non-game perspective) point of view, nor does it make any sense RAI given the function of all other restrictions based on flat-out movement.

In short, if you allow models to disembark from a wrecked flat-out transport, you must also logically deny that transport a cover save since it is no longer moving flat out when it was destroyed.

The above is obviously not true given the current assault rules, the reasoning for them given in the BRB, and general logic.

So, while I can agree that you may be able to interpret the sentence differently if you so choose, you are not seeing the forest for the trees. Step back and look at the rest of the rules, and then try and understand the other side of this debate. If everything else works one way, why should one thing work any differently?

BeRzErKeR wrote:

Rephistorch wrote:
The problem is, the rules in the BRB don't tell you that disembarkation is disallowed for the player turn. It also doesn't tell you that it's disallowed for the game turn. It only tells you that it is disallowed in that movement phase when a fast transport moves flat out.

The bolded line there is incorrect. What it tells is that disembarkation is disallowed, if the vehicle has moved flat-out in that movement phase.

It makes a difference, it honestly does. And you still haven't answered my question; given that the sentence literally CANNOT be referring to 'the phase in which you disembark', since it applies to ALL phases (and you can be forced to disembark in any of them) but tells you to check whether the vehicle moved flat-out in the MOVEMENT phase specifically, what tells you that you are allowed to disembark in, say, the Shooting phase of a turn in which the vehicle has moved flat-out?

The sentence literally can be referring to the phase in which you disembark. It does not apply to all phases as it does not say that it does. It tells you to check whether the vehicle has moved flat-out in "THAT (the current)" movement phase, not "the" movement phase.

The issue here is, "What is that movement phase?"

My interpretation is that it is the movement phase in which you are trying to disembark.

Your interpretation is that it's the player turn in which your vehicle has moved.

Other people's interpretations could be that it's in the game turn in which your vehicle has moved.

The rules don't say player turn, and they don't same game turn. Unless they say game turn or player turn, then the rules don't apply to that broad of a scope, and that's why you can disembark in subsequent phases. The rules for assaulting a vehicle clearly state things like "In the previous turn". This rule has no such exceptions or allowances.

I've said my peace, and I've clearly explained my position (most clearly in the quote below). Unless someone has fresh, new arguments that don't include "It doesn't say only your movement phase!", while utterly and totally ignoring the fact and irony that it doesn't say that it includes anything other than your movement phase, this will be my final post.

That's the problem. You're adding [of the turn]. You really should be saying "in THAT movement phase" period. Is it that movement phase (the phase itself) anymore? No - then you may disembark.

Here are a several different ways to interpret this sentence. I can understand where the first 2 or 3 stances are coming from, however, I believe the first one to be most correct.
1. if the fast transport vehicle moves flat out in that movement phase (in which you want or need to disembark), units inside may not disembark.
2. if the fast transport vehicle moves flat out in that [turn's] movement phase (in which you want or need to disembark), units inside may not disembark.
3. if the fast transport vehicle moves flat out in that [game turn's] movement phase (in which you want or need to disembark), units inside may not disembark.
4. if the fast transport vehicle moves flat out in that [game's first] movement phase (in which you want or need to disembark), units inside may not disembark.
5. if the fast transport vehicle moves flat out in that [game's last] movement phase (in which you want or need to disembark), units inside may not disembark.
6. if the fast transport vehicle moves flat out in that [anything you want here] movement phase (in which you want or need to disembark), units inside may not disembark.

The rules do not tell us to add further qualifiers (turn, game turn), therefore we must look to what it says, which is "in that movement phase". Adding any other modifiers, whatsoever, is not following what is written.

Again I pose the question, if it's not limited to your movement phase, why is it limited to your player turn? Why isn't it limited to your whole game turn? The most logical reading of this sentence is to take what is written and not add any additional qualifiers.

So by that same logic, Rephistorch, if you shoot at a target just once in a game, for the whole game your unit is restricted to only assaulting that one target?

Rephistorch wrote:

BeRzErKeR wrote:

Rephistorch wrote:
The problem is, the rules in the BRB don't tell you that disembarkation is disallowed for the player turn. It also doesn't tell you that it's disallowed for the game turn. It only tells you that it is disallowed in that movement phase when a fast transport moves flat out.

The bolded line there is incorrect. What it tells is that disembarkation is disallowed, if the vehicle has moved flat-out in that movement phase.

It makes a difference, it honestly does. And you still haven't answered my question; given that the sentence literally CANNOT be referring to 'the phase in which you disembark', since it applies to ALL phases (and you can be forced to disembark in any of them) but tells you to check whether the vehicle moved flat-out in the MOVEMENT phase specifically, what tells you that you are allowed to disembark in, say, the Shooting phase of a turn in which the vehicle has moved flat-out?

The sentence literally can be referring to the phase in which you disembark. It does not apply to all phases as it does not say that it does. It tells you to check whether the vehicle has moved flat-out in "THAT (the current)" movement phase, not "the" movement phase.

The issue here is, "What is that movement phase?"

My interpretation is that it is the movement phase in which you are trying to disembark.

Your interpretation is that it's the player turn in which your vehicle has moved.

Other people's interpretations could be that it's in the game turn in which your vehicle has moved.

The rules don't say player turn, and they don't same game turn. Unless they say game turn or player turn, then the rules don't apply to that broad of a scope, and that's why you can disembark in subsequent phases. The rules for assaulting a vehicle clearly state things like "In the previous turn". This rule has no such exceptions or allowances.

I've said my peace, and I've clearly explained my position (most clearly in the quote below). Unless someone has fresh, new arguments that don't include "It doesn't say only your movement phase!", while utterly and totally ignoring the fact and irony that it doesn't say that it includes anything other than your movement phase, this will be my final post.

That's the problem. You're adding [of the turn]. You really should be saying "in THAT movement phase" period. Is it that movement phase (the phase itself) anymore? No - then you may disembark.

Here are a several different ways to interpret this sentence. I can understand where the first 2 or 3 stances are coming from, however, I believe the first one to be most correct.
1. if the fast transport vehicle moves flat out in that movement phase (in which you want or need to disembark), units inside may not disembark.
2. if the fast transport vehicle moves flat out in that [turn's] movement phase (in which you want or need to disembark), units inside may not disembark.
3. if the fast transport vehicle moves flat out in that [game turn's] movement phase (in which you want or need to disembark), units inside may not disembark.
4. if the fast transport vehicle moves flat out in that [game's first] movement phase (in which you want or need to disembark), units inside may not disembark.
5. if the fast transport vehicle moves flat out in that [game's last] movement phase (in which you want or need to disembark), units inside may not disembark.
6. if the fast transport vehicle moves flat out in that [anything you want here] movement phase (in which you want or need to disembark), units inside may not disembark.

The rules do not tell us to add further qualifiers (turn, game turn), therefore we must look to what it says, which is "in that movement phase". Adding any other modifiers, whatsoever, is not following what is written.

Again I pose the question, if it's not limited to your movement phase, why is it limited to your player turn? Why isn't it limited to your whole game turn? The most logical reading of this sentence is to take what is written and not add any additional qualifiers.

But you still haven't answered my question.

If you are not trying to disembark in a Movement phase, how can the rule be referencing "the movement phase in which you are disembarking"?

Fearspect wrote:So by that same logic, Rephistorch, if you shoot at a target just once in a game, for the whole game your unit is restricted to only assaulting that one target?

I would definitely say not, although the wording is fairly similar. To me the main difference is their choice of using the phrase "in that movement phase". That has to be referring to something, and I've been interpreting it to mean "that" particular movement phase in which the unit is trying to disembark. This paragraph says, "in the shooting phase", and "previously shot at" confirming that the action happened in a different phase... However, I do see more clearly the validity of thinking "that" movement phase could be referring to the turn's movement phase.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

BeRzErKeR wrote:

But you still haven't answered my question.

If you are not trying to disembark in a Movement phase, how can the rule be referencing "the movement phase in which you are disembarking"?

Then the rule doesn't apply. If it's not the movement phase in which you are disembarking, there is no restriction.

"in that movement phase" refers to the movement phase of that turn.

They specified movement phase, and not just "in that phase"

Had they said "in that phase" it would work like you said rep, but they specify that movement phase so it can only be read as that turns movement phase.