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.

This is my first post on Dakka so please be gentle. I searched for this topic and couldn't find it. If it's been discussed, please direct me to it and close the thread.

5th ed. A wonderful thing. But, locally, we're having issues on disembarkation pertaining to a IC joined to a squad in a vehicle. Scenario:

I have a 9 man DE Raider squad and I join an Archon to them during deployment. Thus, they are all on the Raider. Turn one I zoom them up and after the Raider's movement is over, I disembark the squad and leave the IC on board per the rules on the top of p67, second column. The next turn I zoom the Archon up in the Raider and disembark him since transports can be ridden by anyone now after deployment.

This example could easily work for any army with transports that have space for an IC to join the squad.

The point of contention we're having is that the rules on p48 for joining a squad to a character seem to conflict with the rules on p67 (specifically the one that says you can disembark the squad or character and leave the other in the vehicle). p48 says that if the character is within 2" of a squad, they are joined. If I move the vehicle, the max distance the squad can disembark is within 2" of the vehicle and thus the character. So, if I use the rules on p67 that says I can split and disembark the unit, what happens if they're within 2" of the vehicle carrying the IC? Is the IC forced to come outside the transport and join the unit involuntarily? Obviously if they disembark prior to vehicle movement, they have the option to run two different ways and get out of the 2" issue.

Similarly, what happens when a Chaplain is riding alone in a Rhino and it stops next to a squad? Is he forced out of the vehicle to join the squad since he's within 2" and you can't have a squad half in and half out of a transport?

Does the fact of being in a vehicle supercede the 2" rule? Will vehicles carrying squads who run around with empty transport slots involuntarily 'suck up' any Independant Characters who are on the field if they get within 2"?

I know what I'm voting for but I want some feedback here. Thanks!

Murphy

I'm surprised that anyone in your gaming group actually felt the need to make this argument, frankly.

While not explicitly written in the rules I'd wager that upwards of 95% of players will naturally assume that ICs embarked on vehicles do not (and cannot) join units that are outside of the vehicle.


If there is one area of the new rulebook that is pretty poorly fleshed out it is how embarked models interact with the rest of the game.

Hey, yhprum01, funny seeing you here! And about this issue, as well.

While only 5 people voted, they are unanimous: http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/214538.page

Hola Val! Sorry I didn't see your poll on my search... my apologies. Now there are 6 in agreement.

So Yakface, if you we're judging a tourney and this came up, I take it that you would say that a vehicle carrying a character can pull within 2" of a squad and there would be no need to bail out and join? And concurrently, if a vehicle moves and disembarks only the squad, the character is okay to remain in the vehicle?

I agree with thos statements but for some strange reason your decision holds a little more authority than mine in the 40k realm (LOL).

Thanks for your time.

Murphy

The funny thing is Yak is that they think I am arguing legitimacy of that tactic. I'm not. I am only debating on the conditions of making it possible.

While 95% of players naturally assume that the IC embarked on the vehicle do not and cannot join units outside of the vehicle, the unit and/ or embarked character must stay more than 2" away from each other. The first bullet point on P.48 tells us this.

Capt K

yakface wrote:
I'm surprised that anyone in your gaming group actually felt the need to make this argument, frankly.

While not explicitly written in the rules I'd wager that upwards of 95% of players will naturally assume that ICs embarked on vehicles do not (and cannot) join units that are outside of the vehicle.


If there is one area of the new rulebook that is pretty poorly fleshed out it is how embarked models interact with the rest of the game.

Again, I state that I'm not debating the legitamacy of the tactic. I'm debating the assertion that an IC in a transport within 2" of a squad must join the squad, which you argue invalidates this tactic in certain situations.

I'm debating the assertion that an IC in a transport within 2" of a squad must join the squad, which you argue invalidates this tactic in certain situations.

and I'm saying he has to stay away from said squad unless he plans on joining it because the rules tell you to...which in certain circumstances does in fact make the maneuver impossible.

Capt K

And I think you're pretty much alone in that interpretation.

To quote Crimson Fist on another forum:

I think that it is reasonable to view the vehicle as a defacto 2" separation for the characters. I say this because of the reasoning for the 2" rule which is very clearly described in the book. One of the few times where "Intent" IS RAW. The reason for the 2" rule is to make it unerrably and unmistakably clear whether a character is in a squad or not because on the jumble of the battlefield/table it's easy to not see or forget (or forget to say) when they are in or out. Most likely this one one of those issues that caused some complaining in 4th.

Sure you can take that stance, but then it is an intent argument, not what the rules say. You still haven't refuted my point regarding characters counting as "on the table" in those posts either.

Capt K

Give me a page reference to the section that you're refering to, IE that an IC in a vehicle's rules will affect the battlefield. I can't find it in the index. I want to be able to intelligently argue this.

And as CF put it, Intent can be argued, since the author so graciously included his intent in the rule.

P.66 last sentence of the second paragraph. "If players need to measure a range involving the embarked unit (except for shooting), this range is measured to or from the vehicle's hull."

Capt K

Could you also quote the part in the rules that the author is giving intent?

Capt K

Valhallan42nd wrote:Give me a page reference to the section that you're refering to, IE that an IC in a vehicle's rules will affect the battlefield. I can't find it in the index. I want to be able to intelligently argue this.

And as CF put it, Intent can be argued, since the author so graciously included his intent in the rule.

I agree with Capt K, mostly because of the aforementioned bullet point. Additionally, the Eldar FAQ certainly seems to indicate that vehicles aren't a barrier to Wraithsight, which is kinda like coherency.

Q. If you have Wraithguards embarked in a Wave
Serpent, do they still have to make the Wraithsight
roll?

If yes, can a friendly psyker within 6" of the
vehicle prevent them from making this roll?

A. Yes, and yes.

Frankly there are a lot of scenarios were an IC can get sucked into a unit. All new Chaos Lash possibilities... lash a unit of StormBoyz next to Ghazghkull: now the Stormboyz move at his speed (slow and purposeful) until he can move away from them.

"This is to make clear to the opponent if the character has joined the unit or not."

By staying in the transport, it is clear the character has not joined the unit.

Also, are you working off a PDF? I'm looking at pg. 66, and there is no mention of that rule. What I have is "Transports have several additional characteristics: Transport Capacity, Fire Points, and Access Points."

I don't think that is at all clear. Maybe you intend for the squad to get into the transport or the character to disembark and join the squad? There's no way to know what you intend, unless you leave the 2" to make it clear. How do I know if he is "sucked up" or part of a planned joining of a squad? (A: if IC is within 2")

realgenius wrote:

Frankly there are a lot of scenarios were an IC can get sucked into a unit. All new Chaos Lash possibilities... lash a unit of StormBoyz next to Ghazghkull: now the Stormboyz move at his speed (slow and purposeful) until he can move away from them.

Nope. ICs can only join/leave units in the movement phase.

If you intend for the squad to join the character in a transport... then they'll enter the transport, making it obvious at that point.

As for wraith sight being like coherency; it is not coherency. Apples and Oranges.

By insisting on this interpretation of the rule, you create absurd and illogical conclusions. What about an IC approaching the back of an LRC where there are not access points, yet contains a squad? Can he not approach more than 2.1 inches to the LRC, considering there's a squad inside, even though he can't possibly join the squad because there are no access points? Why are you complicating what should be very simple?

Valhallan42nd wrote:If you intend for the squad to join the character in a transport... then they'll enter the transport, making it obvious at that point.

As for wraith sight being like coherency; it is not coherency. Apples and Oranges.

By insisting on this interpretation of the rule, you create absurd and illogical conclusions. What about an IC approaching the back of an LRC where there are not access points, yet contains a squad? Can he not approach more than 2.1 inches to the LRC, considering there's a squad inside, even though he can't possibly join the squad because there are no access points? Why are you complicating what should be very simple?

You just need to give up on it from a rules perspective. . .because this is exactly the kind of situation that can never fully be eradicated from a rules set without releasing it first to see what kinds of kooky things people come up with.

The 2" IC rule does indeed say:

"This is to make clear to the opponent if the character has joined a unit or not."


While the rules may not specifically say that ICs embarked in vehicles can't join units it does say that units can disembark from vehicles leaving a character behind and within the context of the rule quote provided above I believe the vast majority of players can easily tell that an IC on a vehicle is separate from a unit that has disembarked.

In the end (as you see from your poll results) you're going to end up with a situation just like in 3rd edition with the whole 'models *carrying* rapid fire weapons can't shoot a pistol and charge' situation.

Regardless of what the RAW say in this situation enough people are naturally going to play it one way that the people who disagree just have to suck it up and accept it or risk being TFG in their gaming group and at tournaments.

Nope. My quote isn't from the PDF, but from the hard cover book. Second column, the final sentence in the second paragraph just before the 2 bullet points. I agree with Yak. Logically, it makes sense that the character and unit are separate, but it isn't what the rules say and most people will play it the common sense way...i.e. that they are separate. I have no problem playing it either way for the exact reasons I listed in a different forum.

Capt K

Valhallan42nd wrote:"This is to make clear to the opponent if the character has joined the unit or not."

By staying in the transport, it is clear the character has not joined the unit.

Also, are you working off a PDF? I'm looking at pg. 66, and there is no mention of that rule. What I have is "Transports have several additional characteristics: Transport Capacity, Fire Points, and Access Points."

yakface wrote:

realgenius wrote:

Frankly there are a lot of scenarios were an IC can get sucked into a unit. All new Chaos Lash possibilities... lash a unit of StormBoyz next to Ghazghkull: now the Stormboyz move at his speed (slow and purposeful) until he can move away from them.

Nope. ICs can only join/leave units in the movement phase.

Right, while it doesn't say this explicitly, it does say the 2" check happens at the end of their Movement phase. And I can't imagine a way someone else could compel movement in your movement phase.

What about an IC and another unit that Deep Strikes and they scatter within 2" of each other? Another way to get sucked in.

... all thats need is a line same as in the 4th ED saying ' units in vechicals are not on the board' with some addition for rules that affect X" from the IC

Actually, i think pg 66 first column may have something that may help.

Under transport capacity it states

The entire unit must be embarked on a transport if any part of it is - a unit may never be partially embarked or spread across multiple vehicles.

Now, if you consider this with the rule exception for ICs on page 67 that states a unit may disembark while leaving the character behind and it easily clarifies it in my opinion.

The arguments that could be made is either 1. You cant disembark and leave the character behind because the whole unit must disembark, or 2. the unit can not disembark unless the character goes with. Both of these are countered by the rule that explicitly states you can. The other argument that could be made is that the IC is still attached because he is still within 2" because of the vehicles hull, but that too is contradicted by the rule that states the unit must all disembark.

It seems to me to be cut and dry that it is possible to leave the IC on board and he would count as detatched, and this is the way I would rule on it if I was running an event and it came up.

I think that the main issue being debated here is the 'involuntarily sucked in' thing, which is patently ridiculous. The 2" rule was originally created for the purposes of shooting- which is why the 'check' was made at the end of the movement phase- to see if the character is able to be targeted separately from the unit.