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

 BlackTalos wrote:

 FlingitNow wrote:

Suprisingly, that's how the Rules work: Permission given to override a restriction. Let's get back to how Ever-living means you actually break Rules. I guess most of your games "break" rules then?

Telling you to follow a rule is not making an exception to that rule. It is telling you to follow it not break it. Stop trying to claim following a rule means breaking it.

I am not making any claims. I am following Rules which give permissions over other Rules. That's just how the system works.

Ever-living is telling you to follow its Rule. You are the one saying it "breaks" the Instant Death rule. If that is your definition of how the game works, then sure, i am breaking A LOT of Rules...

nosferatu1001 wrote:
Black - no. The IC MODEL has permission as a model to move according to its unit type

The thrust move requires the IC model to evoke a rule available to units

The IC is not a unit. This is clear. The IC has permission to move, yes, but it still has no permission to act as a unit. It has permission as a model.

Model permission is insufficient. This is a demonstrated fact.

What Rule are you using to say that the IC is not a Unit? Is it this?
"he counts as part of the unit for all rules purposes, though he still follows the rules for characters."

The RaW, demonstrably, point out that characters "follow the movement rules for models of their type". They do this independently from the rest of the Unit.
You could almost say (for the sake of understanding) that they are their own Unit when it comes to following the rules for movement. (Where they follow the rules for models of their type). Before you quote this and disagree, Characters (especially not-IC ones) are obviously part of the Unit (and never their own Unit). But for the sake of movement, they "follow the movement rules for models of their type".

Now the Fact that "Jet Pack Unit" is referred to, but never defined, is the common assumption not that "Jet Pack Unit" is when all the models concerned are "Jet Pack Infantry" (for eg.)?

 FlingitNow wrote:

 Kriswall wrote:
2. The rules refer to a "Jet Pack Unit", but never define what that means. We're forced to make a judgment call. Not everyone will make the same call.

2) with no rules definition we fall to English. A jet pack unit must refer to a unit of jet pack models. Thus all the models must be jetpack.

So when a rule says "follow the movement rules for models of their type" which models does this apply to?
Are they all Jet Pack models?
Does that make them a "Jet Pack Unit"?

ALL models follow the movement rules for models of their type. I think the Character call out is just to make sure we realize that there is no practical difference between Infantry and Infantry (Character) as relates to movement.

If a model has the Jet Pack type, then it's a Jet Pack Model.

A model can never be a Jet Pack Unit, as models and units are different things. The model can be part of a Jet Pack Unit. The model can even be part of a Jet Pack Unit composed of only one model. Units are kind of like containers. Models are the contents. Containers can do things like open and close. Contents can't open or close. Units can do things like initiate Thrust Moves. Models can't initiate Thrust Moves.

Not quite, a unit is like a container but the models are the material which the container is made of. You said it yourself, the model is part of the unit, it is not held by the unit. When a unit moves, the models are moved then the unit is said to have moved. When a unit attacks the models attack.

Gravmyr wrote:
You posted two options above but there is a clear representation of the entire unit that was not covered and that is a unit has all types that it's models have. This is the only comprehensive interpretation that follows the thought that a unit is made up of all models. If we do this the unit that we are discussing works just fine with each model moving and acting by it's own rules as put forth by the movement rules.

This is indeed a third correct alternative. Only because "whole" Unit Types are just not defined in the BrB.

It may solve some issues, but it will create others. Such as Tau warriors with attached Drones. By this definition, the Unit <Tau Warriors> is an Infantry, Jet-Pack Infantry Unit.

If you apply "A Jet Pack unit that is not locked in combat or charging can move up to 2D6" in the Assault phase" then the Rule applies to the whole Unit (and all of them can move). This being of course, if you do not take the whole "they are their own Units within Units" which is even harder to get at by RaW, but i can grasp the concept....

Also, if enemies have Preferred Enemy (Jump Units), it would apply to all the Rolls.
And possibly more issues of the same sort.

It's understandable, but IMHO not the valid answer. I would rather go back to working with Interpretation B as how things work in RaW

Unless of course you look at my earlier post and parse the full text of what a unit is.

"A Jet Pack unit that is not locked in combat or charging can move up to 2D6" in the Assault phase"

Becomes

"Jet Pack models in a Jet Pack unit, that is not locked in combat or charging, can move up to 2d6" in the Assault Phase."

We can't have a unit without models, in fact we can't move just the unit or attack with the unit we always move and attack with the models.

 Kriswall wrote:

 BlackTalos wrote:

 FlingitNow wrote:

Suprisingly, that's how the Rules work: Permission given to override a restriction. Let's get back to how Ever-living means you actually break Rules. I guess most of your games "break" rules then?

Telling you to follow a rule is not making an exception to that rule. It is telling you to follow it not break it. Stop trying to claim following a rule means breaking it.

I am not making any claims. I am following Rules which give permissions over other Rules. That's just how the system works.

Ever-living is telling you to follow its Rule. You are the one saying it "breaks" the Instant Death rule. If that is your definition of how the game works, then sure, i am breaking A LOT of Rules...

nosferatu1001 wrote:
Black - no. The IC MODEL has permission as a model to move according to its unit type

The thrust move requires the IC model to evoke a rule available to units

The IC is not a unit. This is clear. The IC has permission to move, yes, but it still has no permission to act as a unit. It has permission as a model.

Model permission is insufficient. This is a demonstrated fact.

What Rule are you using to say that the IC is not a Unit? Is it this?
"he counts as part of the unit for all rules purposes, though he still follows the rules for characters."

The RaW, demonstrably, point out that characters "follow the movement rules for models of their type". They do this independently from the rest of the Unit.
You could almost say (for the sake of understanding) that they are their own Unit when it comes to following the rules for movement. (Where they follow the rules for models of their type). Before you quote this and disagree, Characters (especially not-IC ones) are obviously part of the Unit (and never their own Unit). But for the sake of movement, they "follow the movement rules for models of their type".

Now the Fact that "Jet Pack Unit" is referred to, but never defined, is the common assumption not that "Jet Pack Unit" is when all the models concerned are "Jet Pack Infantry" (for eg.)?

 FlingitNow wrote:

 Kriswall wrote:
2. The rules refer to a "Jet Pack Unit", but never define what that means. We're forced to make a judgment call. Not everyone will make the same call.

2) with no rules definition we fall to English. A jet pack unit must refer to a unit of jet pack models. Thus all the models must be jetpack.

So when a rule says "follow the movement rules for models of their type" which models does this apply to?
Are they all Jet Pack models?
Does that make them a "Jet Pack Unit"?

ALL models follow the movement rules for models of their type. I think the Character call out is just to make sure we realize that there is no practical difference between Infantry and Infantry (Character) as relates to movement.

If a model has the Jet Pack type, then it's a Jet Pack Model.

A model can never be a Jet Pack Unit, as models and units are different things. The model can be part of a Jet Pack Unit. The model can even be part of a Jet Pack Unit composed of only one model. Units are kind of like containers. Models are the contents. Containers can do things like open and close. Contents can't open or close. Units can do things like initiate Thrust Moves. Models can't initiate Thrust Moves.

I do agree, and my basis is completely within those bounds. Character models have allowances to move by their type, independently from the other models.
So although the Unit container can only Open / Close on the left, the Character has permission to Open / Close on the Top.

We know he has permission, but we also know that as a "model", he can not Open / Close at all. So what container is he in?
Not the Unit one as he's not following their movement Rules. So he's in a container, inside the Unit container. (An IC does not follow "for all rules purposes" at this point)

Either (your interpretation) he's just a model with more movement permission that he can never use (What does allowing you to move "as your Type" allow you to do past the rules Units already have?).
Or (my interpretation) he "does not count as part of the unit for this rule purpose". Which is why that Rule has a "though". The character, who is in some container (i refuse to call it "Unit") can Open/Close and Thrust move.
He's still part of the Unit (especially non-ICs), but he has movement allowances "outside" of the Unit:
- Allowances "outside" of the Unit Type.


Now have a read of this Rule, and try to grasp why it would be needed:

CHARACTER AND MOVING
Characters follow the movement rules for models of their type, whether Infantry, Jump Infantry, Bikes, etc. However, remember that they must maintain unit coherency with any unit they are in.

My belief is that the Characters following movement rules for models of their type rule is there just to reinforce the idea that Infantry models and Infantry (Character) models move the same way.

Still waiting on explicit permission for anything other than a Jet Pack Unit to initiate a Thrust Move OR explicit permission to treat a Character model as an entirely separate unit for movement purposes.

Black - again, we have a rule thast a unit must evoke, and a rule that the model can evoike. TGhe Character can move, but cannot itself evoke a rule assigned to aunit

You CANNOT say it is "like" a unit for movement purposesa, because the urles never say that. The ruler is, functionally, redundant.

Man, I feel like with the last 3 books there are people just trying to change the definition of words to make the rules work how they want.

 gwarsh41 wrote:
Man, I feel like with the last 3 books there are people just trying to change the definition of words to make the rules work how they want.

Do you have anything interesting to add from a rules debate perspective? I'm not even sure which side of the fence you fall on in this debate.

Let me start by saying that I don't think RAW are complete enough to fully answer this question, so this is a HIWPI post

I've been reading along but not posting because I wasn't sure where I stood on this until reading Gravmyr's posts.

I have to say that I agree with Gravmyr, and I can explain why - it breaks the least rules.

If I make a unit composed entirely of independent characters that has a Wolf Lord on foot, a Wolf Lord with a jump pack, a Wolf Lord on a bike, and a Wolf Lord on a thunderwolf mount what is the unit type? Is it infantry, jump infantry, bike, or cavalry? I would argue (and I think Gravmyr would agree with me here) that it is all of those things.

If you subscribe to interpretation A, then the unit type would depend on who joined who and all but one model would lose their movement rules.

If you subscribe to interpretation B, then none of the models get to use their movement rules because there is no core unit.

If you subscribe to Interpretation C (that all of the models get to use their own movement rules), then everybody gets to use their movement rules.

If you subscribe to either A or B, does the unit go to ground when pinned? If you subscribe to C, the models that can go to ground would go to ground and the other models would simply be stuck with them - in my mind this makes the most sense.

If you subscribe to either A or B, does the unit get to turbo boost or run? If you subscribe to C, then the models that can run could run, and the models that can turbo boost could turbo boost.

If you subscribe to C, then a jet pack model could make his thrust move while the infantry models stood still.

Again, this is HIWPI because I don't believe the rules give adequate direction for units with mixed model types in it.

Every post here is HIWPI as none can answer the question of what unit type a unit is in a mixed unit per the rules. Until that is sorted any comment about the mixed unit being or not being a particular type is known to be interpretation not RAW. If we assume the unit is the sum of it's parts not separate from them then many issues throughout the rules make sense.

You might still encounter issues with rules that call upon specific Unit types "as a Unit". Being all of your Types together will enable certain situations that might not have been intended...

I am also being vague because i don't like it but have to agree with validity due to lack of RaW, and have had my fill of RaW Philosophy.

Or you parse as I stated above...

Gravmyr wrote:
Or you parse as I stated above...

I think i struggle to comprehend.

Imaginary Rule, that you try to apply to "independent characters that has a Wolf Lord on foot, a Wolf Lord with a jump pack, a Wolf Lord on a bike, and a Wolf Lord on a thunderwolf mount (attached to scouts)":

"If you Hit an enemy Jump Unit (with this pistol), all models in the unit are removed from play"

I would guess your conclusion is that only "a Wolf Lord with a jump pack" gets removed, but why?

This thread needs to be locked. The rules aren't well written enough to ever come to a conclusion. Work it out among your opponents.

If playing in a tournament, simply ask the TO what his house rule will be.

I'd still like Gravmyr's response first, as i've not understood that position fully yet.

A and B have been argued enough, i concur. Still curious about "C"

If you parse "Jetpack Unit" as Jetpack models in a unit then that will solve most problems. Another example is the oft argued wording in the psychic phase. "For the purposes of all rules, the term 'Psyker' and 'Psyker unit' refers to any unit with the Psyker, Psychic Pilot, or Brotherhood of Psykers/Sorcerers special rules." If we parse "any unit" to means "any unit with models" then the sentence actually makes sense in that models have special rules not units. If we separate the two in name we separate them in nature.

If you believe we can do anything with a unit without doing so with it's models please post it.

Gravmyr wrote:
If you parse "Jetpack Unit" as Jetpack models in a unit then that will solve most problems. Another example is the oft argued wording in the psychic phase. "For the purposes of all rules, the term 'Psyker' and 'Psyker unit' refers to any unit with the Psyker, Psychic Pilot, or Brotherhood of Psykers/Sorcerers special rules." If we parse "any unit" to means "any unit with models" then the sentence actually makes sense in that models have special rules not units. If we separate the two in name we separate them in nature.

If you believe we can do anything with a unit without doing so with it's models please post it.

I agree that this resolves many issues and it's basically now I normally play things... but it's not RaW. It's requiring us to add a definition that doesn't exist in the rules. You're effectively saying that you want to replace the word unit with the word models in certain rules to make the rules function how you want them to function. That's a house rule. It's a decent one that most people wouldn't argue against, but it's still a house rule.

We haven't even touched on non-Character situations. What about a scenario where you have 6 Fire Warriors and 2 Gun Drones in one unit. They were all purchased as part of a Tau Empire Fire Warrior Squad. The Fire Warriors are Infantry models and the Gun Drones are Jet Pack Infantry models. None of the models are Characters and there are no ICs present. Is the unit a "Jet Pack Unit"? Can the Gun Drones ever perform a Thrust Move while the Fire Warriors are alive? Again, it comes back to how you define "Jet Pack Unit". RaW, I don't think they can. HIWPI, I generally allow it and have never had an opponent say I can't. I'll make a Thrust Move to reposition the Drones to wherever I want them, but still maintain coherency with the models who can't Thrust.

Every post here is HIWPI as none can answer the question of what unit type a unit is in a mixed unit per the rules. Until that is sorted any comment about the mixed unit being or not being a particular type is known to be interpretation not RAW. If we assume the unit is the sum of it's parts not separate from them then many issues throughout the rules make sense.

Well I can sort the first part. The unit has no type, units don't have types models do. So a mixed unit doesn't have a type it is simply a mixed unit. Units don't and never have types as nothing ever gives a unit a type.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

If you believe we can do anything with a unit without doing so with it's models please post it.

Rolling to hit and to wound with both shooting and CC is ONLY done against units not models.

I'm not replacing it, I'm putting forth that trying to say the unit is somehow separate from the models is impossible to play. The term unit refers to the models that compose the unit. I still have yet to have anyone put forth anything you can do with the unit that does not involve the models.



Automatically Appended Next Post:

 FlingitNow wrote:
Well I can sort the first part. The unit has no type, units don't have types models do. So a mixed unit doesn't have a type it is simply a mixed unit. Units don't and never have types as nothing ever gives a unit a type.

Then there is nothing about the statement that Jet Pack Units can make the Thrust Move in the Assault Phase in your opinion, even in a mixed unit that stops models from using thrust move then?

Rolling to hit and to wound with both shooting and CC is ONLY done against units not models.

Where are you getting the BS to make the roll and the strength of the weapons as well as the Toughness you are rolling against then? Please enlighten me how you do this without the involement of the models.

Then there is nothing about the statement that Jet Pack Units can make the Thrust Move in the Assault Phase in your opinion, even in a mixed unit that stops models from using thrust move then?

Sorry your English is difficult to follow not entirely sure what you are saying here. But yes units don't have a type so a Jet Pack unit can ONLY refer to a unit made up exclusively of Jet Pack unit type models. There is no other RaW way to interpret that.

Where are you getting the BS to make the roll and the strength of the weapons as well as the Toughness you are rolling against then? Please enlighten me how you do this without the involement of the models.

Bs comes from firing models not target unit. You use the Toughness of the unit which is defined as the majority toughness of the models within it. You do not perform these actions against the models at all this is against a unit. Only at wound allocation do the models become directly involved.

 FlingitNow wrote:
But yes units don't have a type so a Jet Pack unit can ONLY refer to a unit made up exclusively of Jet Pack unit type models. There is no other RaW way to interpret that.

Really? What in the Thrust rules states all models must make the thrust move? What in the rules states that all models must be of that unit type?

Bs comes from firing models not target unit. You use the Toughness of the unit which is defined as the majority toughness of the models within it. You do not perform these actions against the models at all this is against a unit. Only at wound allocation do the models become directly involved.

Above I asked for something you do with a unit that does not involve the models. You then went directly to state you use the models to determine everything about the attack. How is that doing an action without involving the models?

Gravmyr wrote:
Every post here is HIWPI as none can answer the question of what unit type a unit is in a mixed unit per the rules. Until that is sorted any comment about the mixed unit being or not being a particular type is known to be interpretation not RAW. If we assume the unit is the sum of it's parts not separate from them then many issues throughout the rules make sense.

An IC is a unit all on its own. It indicates that clearly on the Army List Entry.

When an IC joins a unit it is a unit in a unit.

However, it loses some of that "unit in a unit" status.

It counts as part of the unit for all intents and purposes except for character rules. Note the use of the word counts as and not is. "Counts as" is very different logically than "is." The IC still is technically a unit in its own right. Just take a look at the Army List Entry. "Counts as" does not strike 'unit' off the Army List Entry. The rules say we treat an IC as part of a unit in certain domains and as a unit in its own right in an overall unit in other domains (specifically the character rules).

The character rules include specific means of handling movement. Independent characters are told via the character rules to follow their own rules for movement.

Unequivocally, the IC is a unit in a mixed unit when it comes to movement so the Jet Pack movement rules trigger without a problem since the Destroyer Lord is a jet pack unit (just read the Army List Entry). In issues other than character rules the IC counts as part of the unit, but you have to follow the character rules in all other cases and the movement exception means we are treating the IC as a unit in its own right in a mixed unit. The blanket statement "counts as part of unit for all intents and purposes" does not cover the character rules so the IC is a unit in a unit when it comes to character rules and therewith movement rules.

Voila. All RAW.

Really? What in the Thrust rules states all models must make the thrust move? What in the rules states that all models must be of that unit type?

The first question nothing why even ask that, no one has made that claim. The second question is answered in the post. Do you have something that defines Jet Pack unit beyond the standard English?

Above I asked for something you do with a unit that does not involve the models. You then went directly to state you use the models to determine everything about the attack. How is that doing an action without involving the models?

Because it doesn't involve the models of the unit in question. I really don't get your point here. You asked for something it was provided.

 FlingitNow wrote:
The second question is answered in the post. Do you have something that defines Jet Pack unit beyond the standard English?

You made a claim now it is up to you to back that up with a rule quote or an explanation why it is the only possible interpretation. A simple statement that it is the only possible interpretation is not proof.

Because it doesn't involve the models of the unit in question. I really don't get your point here. You asked for something it was provided.

Except you didn't, by using the models characteristics you involved them. To prove it make the rolls without consulting the models' characteristics. If you can't then they are involved.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
By your own words a unit does not have a type. If that's the case then it can't actually refer to a unit, it has to be referring to the models that have the Jet pack unit type.

You made a claim now it is up to you to back that up with a rule quote or an explanation why it is the only possible interpretation. A simple statement that it is the only possible interpretation is not proof.

Your inability to understand plain English is not my concern. Units don't have types models do, units are made up of models. A jet pack unit therefore does refer to a type for the unit but must refer to the types of the models within. Does it list anything other than jet pack? Nope so those models can't have types other than Jet Pack. This is RaW as it is literally what the rules say.

By your own words a unit does not have a type. If that's the case then it can't actually refer to a unit, it has to be referring to the models that have the Jet pack unit type.

Nope unit is not model they are separate terms with different meanings. The ONLY thing Jet Pack unit can possibly refer to RaW is a unit of models that all have the Jet Pack type.

As there is no clear definition of what a mixed unit is, RAW is pretty vague. We can argue this over and over again, I've seen it pop up in other threads with no clear winner. We can all agree the book is poorly written as well as the codices. Not sure if this helps or compounds the situation, but most tournaments have ruled that RAI is that a jet infantry character can preform thrust moves when attached to a non jet infantry unit. Just as a psykic character can use powers when attached to a non psykic unit. To say one can and the other is pretty silly. The most reputable tournament league, the ITC have ruled it as such. I realize this is a house rule, but it's the best we have barring an official Gw FAQ.

Play as you wish, but I suggest you adopt a similar house rule if you plan on attending any grand tournaments. Like NOVA, BAO, or the LVO.

An Independent Character is a unit on its own. It has its own Army List Entry and its own unit type and a unit composition of for example "1 Destroyer Lord"

The Independent Character does not count as part of the unit when it comes to character rules. The character rules instruct us to have the characters follow the movement rules for models of their type

The Jet Pack movement rules get triggered just fine in the case of an Independent Character. The Destroyer Lord is a Jet Pack unit on its own and is treated as a unit in a mixed unit with regards to character rules (which include exceptions to movement).

col_impact wrote:
An Independent Character is a unit on its own. It has its own Army List Entry and its own unit type and a unit composition of for example "1 Destroyer Lord"

The Independent Character does not count as part of the unit when it comes to character rules. The character rules instruct us to have the characters follow the movement rules for models of their type

The Jet Pack movement rules get triggered just fine in the case of an Independent Character. The Destroyer Lord is a Jet Pack unit on its own and is treated as a unit in a mixed unit with regards to character rules (which include exceptions to movement).

This is entirely correct.

We know the rules tell us that IC's move according to their own model type.

How does an IC move on its own? Well, Jet Pack Infanry get to make Thrust move in the assault phase. Therefore, as IC's are specifically allowed to follow thier own model rules for movement, Jet Pack Infantry thatare IC's always to make a thrust move. This is overruled by other rules - such as being locked in combat - as that rule also applies in the case of a single IC.

 FlingitNow wrote:
The ONLY thing Jet Pack unit can possibly refer to RaW is a unit of models that all have the Jet Pack type.

I assume you can back that up. As you are well aware, people can and do refer to groups within group all the time. If you walk into a room and refer to 'you guys' it can and often does include other people. I can also walk into said room and refer to just the guys by saying 'you guys.' So no a Jet Pack unit does not have to refer to only a unit made up of only models with the Jet Pack unit type. You are including a determiner that is not present.