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.

Look at your rule book on this one. Don't just flip out and say no, look at you gakking rulebook.
As I read it, and don't like reading it this way, bikes can assault 12".

Under the assault rules Models assault using the same rules as in the movement phase.
Also it states that most models assault 6", but does not clarify that by stating that the model will have a special rule stating such.

Jetpacks specifically state under their rules that they only assault 6, bikes make no such clarification.

I am pretty sure bikes can assault 12". I think there was more evidence in the BGB that supported this but I do not remember.

No. We had this discussion before.

It got locked by Yakface because people cant read.

Bikes Assault 6".

/thread.

By the Emperor, here we go again -Grabs the popcorn-

Search function FTW.

http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/232759.page

http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/226051.page

http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/226401.page

Now let us never speak of this again.

in before lock...

Kungfuhustler wrote:Under the assault rules Models assault using the same rules as in the movement phase.

Yep, and the rules in the movement phase say you move 6". Therefore you are wrong.

You: "But bikes move 12" in the movement phase!"

Yes, and those rules are in the bike section, not the movement phase section. Therefore you are wrong. In short, look at your gakking rulebook.

Edit; Oops, didn't read DebonaireToast's post. On reflection, I prefer the "let us not speak of this again" theory.

Hymirl wrote:

Kungfuhustler wrote:Under the assault rules Models assault using the same rules as in the movement phase.

Yep, and the rules in the movement phase say you move 6". Therefore you are wrong. And no, the rules in the bikes special rules section won't help you because thats the bike's special rules section not the movement phase section.

In short, look at you gakking rulebook.

This pretty much sums it up.

Also IBTL!

Grawr!, you were simply interprating the RaW as you saw fit. I do not believe you were not actually correct, although you belittled everyone who disagreed with you and Had I been a part of that discussion I would have reported you. I'd like to see this matter opened up for POLITE discussion under the idea that 5th ed is 1st ed as it is all that currently matters and takes out all of the 4th ed b/s that most longtime gamers confuse with 5th ed and get corrected for constantly.

Hymirl wrote:

Kungfuhustler wrote:Under the assault rules Models assault using the same rules as in the movement phase.

Yep, and the rules in the movement phase say you move 6". Therefore you are wrong.

You: "But bikes move 12" in the movement phase!"

Yes, and those rules are in the bike section, not the movement phase section. Therefore you are wrong. In short, look at your gakking rulebook.

Edit; Oops, didn't read DebonaireToast's post. On reflection, I prefer the "let us not speak of this again" theory.

That is actually compelling. But as bikes specifically move 12" in the movement phase would this not take priority? other wise they wold only move 6' even though their movement is 12".

#EDIT# there is no reason to be a jerk about it, simmer down now.

Read your PM Kung.

Read page 53.

Does it say anything about bikes assaulting 12"

No.

That is where the additional rules for bikes are.

The rules do not say "As described for the unit type in the movement phase" they say "following the same rules as in the Movement phase". When you look up the rules in movement phase in the rule book, the distance is 6". Also note that in the beginning of the 'Unit Types' section the BGB says: "Except for the for the rules detailed in this section for each unit type, these units follow the same rules as infantry." The assault rules for bikes do not specifically list a different assault range than infantry, so bikes assault the same distance as everything else, besides beasts and cavalry.

Ok then , I shall state my argument, without resorting to attacks like some people.

Quotations used under Fair Use etc etc. If the Mods consider it to be a breach of GW IP please inform me and I shall remove it.
Page 33: "The maximum distance most units can move during an assault is 6" "
Page 34: "All of the models in an assaulting unit make their assault move following the same rules as in the Movement phase, with the exception that they may be moved within 1" of enemy models."
Page 53: "Bikes can move up to 12" in the Movement phase."
page 54: "Beasts and cavalry are capable of making an especially fast assault to charge their enemies. When assaulting they move up to 12" "

So from this, we can see, most units move 6". That is, everything moves 6" unless otherwise specified, like it does for Cavalry.
Nowhere in the rules for the Movement phase does it mention moving 12" at any time. And again, Page 51: "Except for the for the rules detailed in this section for each unit type, these units follow the same rules as infantry."

Furthermore, it doesn't say "may move the same distance in the movement phase" but says "follows the same rules" which doesn't include how far they can move, since those rules are found in the Unit Type part of the book.

Furthermore, the section on jetbikes holds some clues.
Page 53: "In the Assault phase, jetbikes are treated like normal bikes when assaulting, as they must move close to the ground in order to fight."
Page 53 :"All Eldar jetbikes (including Dark Eldar ones) are allowed to move 6" in the Assault phase"

Now, considering how they can move 6" in the Assault phase, and also "Are trated as normal bikes", this clearly means Bikes may move 6" in the Assault Phase, but cannot, like jetbikes, use this move to not assault.

In Conclusion, RaW supports the position of Bikes Assaulting 6", not 12". I also really like the word "Furthermore"
I await your response good sir. I shall see you at dawn on the duelling range! Being a gentleman I shall allow you choice of armament. Good Day to you Sir!

Edits: Spelling and such. A gentleman must keep up appearances!

Kungfuhustler wrote:That is actually compelling. But as bikes specifically move 12" in the movement phase would this not take priority? other wise they wold only move 6' even though their movement is 12".

I already predicted and replied to your point in my previous post...

The assault rules say to follow the rules in the movement phase, not the rules in the movement phase AND and movement phase modifiers in the unit types section.

#EDIT# there is no reason to be a jerk about it, simmer down now.

You told me to go read my gakking rulebook, I'm only treating you with the same manners that you chose to treat everyone else with. Don't like it? Good, next time don't be so rude when you post.

Hymirl wrote:You told me to go read my gakking rulebook, I'm only treating you with the same manners that you chose to treat everyone else with. Don't like it? Good, next time don't be so rude when you post.

Indeed. One is reminded of the antique turn of phrase, "Pot calling the Kettle Black."

I call for the sake of etiquette we attempt to minimise the slander and rudeness that marred the previous attempt at this topic.

Anyone for tea?

There's no way the Admins are gonna let this thread go on.
I wager it'll be locked before 10PM Central Standard (US) time.

Eric

Tea? A cup of Brown Joy!

MagickalMemories wrote:There's no way the Admins are gonna let this thread go on.
I wager it'll be locked before 10PM Central Standard (US) time.

I don't quite understand why you and the rest of the spammers seem to think you're making some sort of worthwhile achievement by posting pointlessly? Is this some sort of irritating dakka custom that I've not learned yet or are you just that desperate for a little extra postcount?

wow some of these rules that keep coming up should be placed in an article so people know whats been

Tri wrote:wow some of these rules that keep coming up should be placed in an article so people know whats been

You mean like a collection of Questions, that are Frequently Asked??? Blasphemy! Such a collection of Frequently Asked Questions would be heretical to the extreme!!!

Gwar! wrote:

Tri wrote:wow some of these rules that keep coming up should be placed in an article so people know whats been

You mean like a collection of Questions, that are Frequently Asked??? Blasphemy! Such a collection of Frequently Asked Questions would be heretical to the extreme!!!

oh i was thinking of starting one ... was going to call it, Bikes will never Assault 12".

Gwar! wrote:

Tri wrote:wow some of these rules that keep coming up should be placed in an article so people know whats been

You mean like a collection of Questions, that are Frequently Asked??? Blasphemy! Such a collection of Frequently Asked Questions would be heretical to the extreme!!!

LOL!!!!! (sorry i have nothing of interest to say, just QFT)

Man, this thread went down-hill even faster than the others, which is quite the achievement.

Edit: In before lock.

Hymirl wrote:Tea? A cup of Brown Joy!

MagickalMemories wrote:There's no way the Admins are gonna let this thread go on.
I wager it'll be locked before 10PM Central Standard (US) time.

I don't quite understand why you and the rest of the spammers seem to think you're making some sort of worthwhile achievement by posting pointlessly? Is this some sort of irritating dakka custom that I've not learned yet or are you just that desperate for a little extra postcount?

yes, when a topic has been beat to death in several threads this is the result.
extra postcount FTW!

Gwar! wrote:

Tri wrote:wow some of these rules that keep coming up should be placed in an article so people know whats been

You mean like a collection of Questions, that are Frequently Asked??? Blasphemy! Such a collection of Frequently Asked Questions would be heretical to the extreme!!!

Alright, for once you actually made me laugh Gwar! =)

Neconilis wrote:Alright, for once you actually made me laugh Gwar! =)

Glad to oblige. If I may ask, what is your view on it? Do you believe bikes can assault 6" (as Asserted in the rules) or 12" (as asserted by some magical make-believe loophole/Easter-egg)

Can I bring up Nob bikers /warboss feel no pain again?

J/K! In before the lock!

frgsinwntr wrote:Can I bring up Nob bikers /warboss feel no pain again?

J/K! In before the lock!

...and let's not forget the age-old deffrolla ramming question...

Oi...my head hurts just thinking about it.

Gwar! wrote:

Neconilis wrote:Alright, for once you actually made me laugh Gwar! =)

Glad to oblige. If I may ask, what is your view on it? Do you believe bikes can assault 6" (as Asserted in the rules) or 12" (as asserted by some magical make-believe loophole/Easter-egg)

In short I agree that bikes assault 6" and 5E is the only edition of 40K I have ever played as well, as I know that point has come up a number of times in previous threads. The wording of everything is definitely less precise than it could/should have been and I don't think anyone will disagree with that, as anytime RAW comes down to semantics it's never a good day. But in the end I can see it RAW and RAI as well, though it's not a stretch to see how it can be misinterpreted.

Hymirl wrote:Tea? A cup of Brown Joy!

MagickalMemories wrote:There's no way the Admins are gonna let this thread go on.
I wager it'll be locked before 10PM Central Standard (US) time.

I don't quite understand why you and the rest of the spammers seem to think you're making some sort of worthwhile achievement by posting pointlessly? Is this some sort of irritating dakka custom that I've not learned yet or are you just that desperate for a little extra postcount?

Trust me, it's not unique to Dakka. Unfortunately it's quite common on the internet it seems.

DebonaireToast wrote:

frgsinwntr wrote:Can I bring up Nob bikers /warboss feel no pain again?

J/K! In before the lock!

...and let's not forget the age-old deffrolla ramming question...

Oi...my head hurts just thinking about it.

While we're at it, how about ID and VTB?

frgsinwntr wrote:Can I bring up Nob bikers /warboss feel no pain again?

J/K! In before the lock!

You may indeed. The answer is they do Benefit from FNP so long as the Painboy is Alive, since FNP is confered on the whole unit by Wargear, and not an intrinsic ability of the nobs. It's the same for a Command Squad Joined by an IC.

DebonaireToast wrote:...and let's not forget the age-old deffrolla ramming question...

Oi...my head hurts just thinking about it.

This one is a little more ambiguous, since the Rulebook does state "Ramming is a Special Form of Tank Shock" but fails to clarify whether everything that is valid for a Tank Shock also applies to Rams, or if Rams need to be specifically mentioned, rather than Included under all Tank Shocks. In other words: GW made the wording as such there is real ambiguity (unlike the supposed "Issue" with Shrike which is Crystal Clear) and needs clarification with you opponent until such time that GW issue an Errata to the issue (at which point I shall be Sipping Tea with the 50 year old Returned Jesus as a 60,000 year old Cybernetic Brain in a Can)

As always gentlemen, happy to help.

This topic has already been discussed to death in a variety of threads (which have kindly been linked to earlier in this thread).

Locking now for redundancy.