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.

Some other point of view that isnt concerned in this case:
The transport rules say "unless specifically stated otherwise" (or the like). So all we have to argue is that Praets have this statement inherently, since they can buy that NS as a transport while other units dont have it inherently, e.g. cause they can buy upgrades that change their unit type.

And my 2cents to the whole beeing embarked without the embarking action: GW rules are not written by technical writers. Almost every single concept relays on undefined phrases, such as "unit" or "model". Taking the rules exactly word by word therfore requires you to come up with definitions for aspects that have no written definition in a way to satisdy every single rule that could affect the given aspect. This leads to conflicts in more than 50% i gues, therfore: stop taking single words as given defined aspects. If the rules tell you to "move" a vehicle its not the same as "moving" an IC into a challenge. If the rules tell you something is "inside" of something it may or not may the same as beeing "embarked" - use the english language as it is designed: with synonyms - not perfectly distinguishable technical phrases!
</rant>

 BetrayTheWorld wrote:

 HANZERtank wrote:
Page 80 BRB, Only Infantry models may embark upon Transports (this does not include Jump or Jet Pack Infantry), unless specifically stated otherwise.

I got 3 pages into this argument and realized people were glazing past this part of the rule every time, assuming it was something added by the person quoting the rule because it was placed in parenthesis. It's not something they added. The underlined/bolded part of the rule quoted above is, indeed, part of the full and actual rule on page 80. It is why jump infantry can't embark on transports.

Which to the best of my knowledge no one is arguing against. Nobody has claimed that Jump and Jet Pack Infantry can embark - the question is can they start the game already embarked? Since they are not embarking, that rule does not apply.

 DJGietzen wrote:

Its not relevant because it does nothing to establish that the movement phase is the only time units can embark. His statement was that the permission to embark in the movement phase did not prohibit permission to become embark at any other time, that is was not a restriction.

Where in my quote from the BRB mentioned the movement phase?

 DJGietzen wrote:
Still don't know what your getting at. In th 5th edition codex an overlord could take a fast open-topped, skimmer DT that had a single IC transport capacity. The CCB and the overlord were two different units. The IC rule was not removed because the overlord was a passenger and the IC was not joining the CCB's unit. The 7th edition codex is very different and has no IC rule on the chariot. In either case an overlord on a chariot never had permission to join another unit.

Which tells me you are not reading what I wrote but stopping when you think you understand. In 6th they changed chariots to their own type they did not remove IC at the point so it would have had IC and been a chariot not embarked.

 DJGietzen wrote:
Being embarked and being treated like you are embarked would be different things. You treat something as X being true only when X is not true but you want things to behave as if it were. Also, not relevant because we are never told to treat the passengers of a night scythe as anything. In this case the only way be can behave if X is true, is for X to actually be true. In this case X is the unit is embarked.

Which it does not say which all of you are stating, that they embark. Where in the deployment rule does it say they are embarked? Remember that no matter what logic says you need a rule to say it. To shoot a weapon I need to have it loaded, logically. Where in the rules does it say the weapons are loaded? The rules do not in fact have to make sense

 DJGietzen wrote:
The white shirt scenario makes no sense. If you can't put on a white shirt you can't walk into a room wearing a white shirt without first having put it on. What your suggesting is that the rules changed to disallow an event after the event has taken place. That's not the case here.

Another point where you did not read what I wrote. Let me spell it out again. You come in wearing a shirt you are told you cannot put it on, read voluntary embarkation. Where does it say you have to take it off, leave the transport? In this case getting the shirt on you does not have to be done by you, deployed on the transport.

 Happyjew wrote:

 BetrayTheWorld wrote:

 HANZERtank wrote:
Page 80 BRB, Only Infantry models may embark upon Transports (this does not include Jump or Jet Pack Infantry), unless specifically stated otherwise.

I got 3 pages into this argument and realized people were glazing past this part of the rule every time, assuming it was something added by the person quoting the rule because it was placed in parenthesis. It's not something they added. The underlined/bolded part of the rule quoted above is, indeed, part of the full and actual rule on page 80. It is why jump infantry can't embark on transports.

Which to the best of my knowledge no one is arguing against. Nobody has claimed that Jump and Jet Pack Infantry can embark - the question is can they start the game already embarked? Since they are not embarking, that rule does not apply.

you just said they would start the game "embarked"

so yes, rules forbidding them from embarking most certainly *DO* apply.

you have zero RAW based argument to have a unit be embarked withing a transport when it has a specific restriction on being embarked, regardless of if it embarks pre game or mid game.

there is no way for a unit to get inside any transport without embarking, whenever that embarkation occurs.

Gravmyr wrote:

Charistoph wrote:

The rules state that a unit within 2" can embark. It does not state this as a requirement. The Reserves rules actually state that a unit can start embarked a transport, without being within 2" during the Movement Phase.

BRB wrote:The whole unit must be able to embark – if some models are out of range, the entire unit must stay outside.

That reads as a requirement to me, that a must not a can.

Indeed it is. Now, tell me how how any models would be out of range of a declaration?

Charistoph wrote:

Embarked is a form of embark. We have not been told to separate this relationship, so we may not. A unit may not be embarked without taking embark in to consideration.

Which is a logic argument not a rules argument would you care to back this up with a rule? We have also not been told by the rules that there is a relationship, that is a logical assumption nothing more. Find a rule stating you have to embark to be embarked. This is exactly like the IC rules interacting with the chariot. There is nothing that stops it from being in the state of being embarked just from embarking.

As has been pointed out repeatedly, this is a language rule that we do not have redefined in the rulebook. Or, at least none that has been posted, either here or on several other sites.

Could you have found it then, and are just refusing to show it?

Frozocrone wrote:To have climbed a mountain, you must have been climbing a mountain.

To have eaten a meal, you must have been eating a meal.

Are people arguing past and present tense? ...ok

Some are saying that they are not linked, but have yet to provide sufficient evidence to support their claim.

Kind of sad, really, the lengths people will go through to get their way.

 easysauce wrote:

 Happyjew wrote:

 BetrayTheWorld wrote:

 HANZERtank wrote:
Page 80 BRB, Only Infantry models may embark upon Transports (this does not include Jump or Jet Pack Infantry), unless specifically stated otherwise.

I got 3 pages into this argument and realized people were glazing past this part of the rule every time, assuming it was something added by the person quoting the rule because it was placed in parenthesis. It's not something they added. The underlined/bolded part of the rule quoted above is, indeed, part of the full and actual rule on page 80. It is why jump infantry can't embark on transports.

Which to the best of my knowledge no one is arguing against. Nobody has claimed that Jump and Jet Pack Infantry can embark - the question is can they start the game already embarked? Since they are not embarking, that rule does not apply.

you just said they would start the game "embarked"

so yes, rules forbidding them from embarking most certainly *DO* apply.

you have zero RAW based argument to have a unit be embarked withing a transport when it has a specific restriction on being embarked, regardless of if it embarks pre game or mid game.

there is no way for a unit to get inside any transport without embarking, whenever that embarkation occurs.

Problem, by reading the RAW in that way, you no longer have permission to have your infantry in Transports from reserves since you need to follow all the restrictions for embarking.

Only Infantry models can embark upon Transports (this does not include Jump or Jet Pack Infantry), unless specifically stated otherwise.

Models can only voluntarily embark or disembark in the Movement Phase. They cannot voluntarily embark and disembark in the same turn. However, they can embark and then be forced to disembark if their Transport is destroyed.

By making the direct connection that you have to perform an embarking to be embarked in the rules, you are not allowed to have models embarked in reserves unless specifically told to.
All models are forbidden from embarking voluntarily outside the Movement phase. An example of a forced action, in this case disembarking, is when the Transport is destroyed. Thus, the only time a model can be embarked in a Transport in reserves is when it is forced to be embarked by a rule. If you have a choice of not being embarked, you cannot voluntarily choose to have them embarked.

This however, does not address being deployed 'inside' a Transport if it is already on the table.

 DJGietzen wrote:


The drop pod's transport capacity specifically lists a dreadnought. This is a specific exception to the transport capacity rules. It is the transport capacity rules that bar non-infantry model from embarking. By listing the dreadnought in the drop pods's transport capacity they have given permission for a dreadnought to embark upon a drop pod. The Night Scythe has no exception to its transport capacity.



Automatically Appended Next Post:
Potential scenario for those who would allow the praetorians in the night scythe. I am playing Inquisition. I have an inquisitor in Terminator Armour that has 3 acolyte henchmen. Those henchmen have a rhino as a dedicated transport. Can the inquisitor be deployed with the henchmen in this rhino?

Can you show me with a rule that permission to carry is the same as permission to embark? permission to embark and permission to carry are two different things.

As for your question Terminator armour gives the owner the bulky special rule. under the rhino under transport capacity it states (looking at blood angels for this if it is different for inquisitions please let me know)

Transport Capacity: Ten models. It cannot carry models with the Bulky, Very Bulky or Extremely Bulky special rules.

Bold the main focus and underlined the part where says cannot carry, it does not say it cannot embark, but if it tried to embark it could not be carried by the transport since the Rhino has a dis allowance of what it can carry. Even to simpily declare it as embarked if it was in reserves means it still cannot be carried by the transport. I hope this helps clear up the difference.

Further Transport Capacities for comparison (thanks Oberron, I was trying to find where the restriction was for Terminators).

Tau Devilfish wrote:Transport Capacity: Twelve models. A Devilfish may transport Drones, but may not transport models with the Bulky, Very Bulky, or Extremely Bulky special rules.

Night Scythe wrote:Transport Capacity: Fifteen models.

Yet still has no permission to carry jump units.
That permission is still utterly absent. Until it is shown, jump units cannot be carried.

nosferatu1001 wrote:
Yet still has no permission to carry jump units.
That permission is still utterly absent. Until it is shown, jump units cannot be carried.

What if the jump unit has permission based on it's other type since jump units follow the rules for types of jump units and what other units it may be?

 Nilok wrote:
Further Transport Capacities for comparison (thanks Oberron, I was trying to find where the restriction was for Terminators).

Tau Devilfish wrote:Transport Capacity: Twelve models. A Devilfish may transport Drones, but may not transport models with the Bulky, Very Bulky, or Extremely Bulky special rules.

Night Scythe wrote:Transport Capacity: Fifteen models.

Stormraven Gunship wrote: Transport Capacity: The Stormraven Gunship can carry two seperate units: one unit of up to 12 models in it's cabin, plus a single Dreadnought of any type in its rear grapples. If a Zooming Stormraven Gunship is wrecked or suffers a Crash and Burn! result, the embarked Dreadnought suffers a Strength 10 hit on it's rear armour, if the Stormraven Gunship is Hovering, the hit is Strength 4 instead. The Stormraven Gunship can carry Jump Infantry.

Here, we see that the Dreadnought is classed as embarked. Yet as a Flyer, it must start in reserves. Therefore, you must have embarked that Dreadnought onto the Stormraven (and follow Embarking rules) during deployment.

The last line also specifically states that the Stormraven can carry Jump Infantry. The Nightscythe does not - ergo, Praetorians can not embark on a Nightscythe.

Oberron wrote:

nosferatu1001 wrote:
Yet still has no permission to carry jump units.
That permission is still utterly absent. Until it is shown, jump units cannot be carried.

What if the jump unit has permission based on it's other type since jump units follow the rules for types of jump units and what other units it may be?

So the explicit StormRaven rule is not required?

So I can Assault having Run, as long as I disdembarked from an Assault Vehicle that turn?

You need permission for the Jump Unit to be carried. The jump unit does NOT have permission, the infantry "portion" does. What happens when you lack permission? You dont get to perform the action.

Basic rules construction here. You need complete permisison, or you dont get to do it.

 Frozocrone wrote:

 Nilok wrote:
Further Transport Capacities for comparison (thanks Oberron, I was trying to find where the restriction was for Terminators).

Tau Devilfish wrote:Transport Capacity: Twelve models. A Devilfish may transport Drones, but may not transport models with the Bulky, Very Bulky, or Extremely Bulky special rules.

Night Scythe wrote:Transport Capacity: Fifteen models.

Stormraven Gunship wrote: Transport Capacity: The Stormraven Gunship can carry two seperate units: one unit of up to 12 models in it's cabin, plus a single Dreadnought of any type in its rear grapples. If a Zooming Stormraven Gunship is wrecked or suffers a Crash and Burn! result, the embarked Dreadnought suffers a Strength 10 hit on it's rear armour, if the Stormraven Gunship is Hovering, the hit is Strength 4 instead. The Stormraven Gunship can carry Jump Infantry.

Here, we see that the Dreadnought is classed as embarked. Yet as a Flyer, it must start in reserves. Therefore, you must have embarked that Dreadnought onto the Stormraven (and follow Embarking rules) during deployment.

The last line also specifically states that the Stormraven can carry Jump Infantry. The Nightscythe does not - ergo, Praetorians can not embark on a Nightscythe.

By following the embarking rules in Deployment, you are not allowed to embark since it is not the Movement phase.

nosferatu1001 wrote:

Oberron wrote:

nosferatu1001 wrote:
Yet still has no permission to carry jump units.
That permission is still utterly absent. Until it is shown, jump units cannot be carried.

What if the jump unit has permission based on it's other type since jump units follow the rules for types of jump units and what other units it may be?

So the explicit StormRaven rule is not required?

So I can Assault having Run, as long as I disdembarked from an Assault Vehicle that turn?

You need permission for the Jump Unit to be carried. The jump unit does NOT have permission, the infantry "portion" does. What happens when you lack permission? You dont get to perform the action.

Basic rules construction here. You need complete permisison, or you dont get to do it.

The permission for the Storm Raven to "carry" Jump Infantry due to the RAW, not RAI, is redundant and does not give them permission to embark.

No, since there is an explicit restriction that overrides even the Assault Vehicle rule, which prevents you from assaulting after running, regardless of other actions. If you have an explicit restriction that restricts Jump units or Jump Infantry from being carried, overriding their Infantry permission, I would like you to please post it.

Jump Infantry have permission from their Infantry rules, but lack an explicit restriction to override their ability to be carried, just from embarking.
This is identical to Jet Pack Monstrous Creatures still being subject to Bring it Down and Monster Hunter, even though it does not specify Jet Pack or Jet Pack Monstrous Creatures.

You are not allowed to voluntarily embark

Please define the rules for embarking in gemeral, not the specific subset of "voluntary" embarkation

Much like MC/Multi Trackers firing two weapons in Overwatch, you have to use existing rules to allow it to happen.

E.g you can either treat Overwatch as a mini shooting phase or not.
1) Treat is as a mini shooting phase and follow all restrictions for it.
2) Don't treat it as a mini shooting phase and allow all weapons to be fired from a single model(so that SM can fire his Bolter, Bolt Pistol and Krak Grenade if he so wishes).

Same thing here for the Praetorians.
During deployment, you either follow Embarking rules as a mini movement phase or you don't.
1) Treat it as a mini movement phase and follow all restrictions (which means Triarch Praetorians can't embark, as there is no specific permission for them).
2) Don't treat it as a mini movement phase and allow anything to embark, such as a Wraithknight using a FA Raider as a personal hover board.

Which scenarios seem better, 1 or 2?

nosferatu1001 wrote:
You are not allowed to voluntarily embark

Please define the rules for embarking in gemeral, not the specific subset of "voluntary" embarkation

Both rules work together to grant the permission. The portion about "voluntary" embarking and disembarking is the header rule for the actions and should be taken as a part of both embarking and disembarking.

EMBARKING AND DISEMBARKING wrote:Models can only voluntarily embark or disembark in the Movement phase.

Embarking wrote:A unit can embark onto a vehicle by moving each model within 2" of its Access Point in the Movement phase - Difficult and Dangerous Terrain tests should be taken as normal.

You move your models within 2" of the access point.
This cannot be done in deployment as you cannot measure a model until it is on the table, and once you have placed it, it is deployed and cannot be moved.
This further cannot be done for reserves, since the models are never on the table to be measured and never have permission to move.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Frozocrone wrote:
Much like MC/Multi Trackers firing two weapons in Overwatch, you have to use existing rules to allow it to happen.

E.g you can either treat Overwatch as a mini shooting phase or not.
1) Treat is as a mini shooting phase and follow all restrictions for it.
2) Don't treat it as a mini shooting phase and allow all weapons to be fired from a single model(so that SM can fire his Bolter, Bolt Pistol and Krak Grenade if he so wishes).

Yep, damned if you do, damned if you don't, Tau always get to shoot their guns.

 Frozocrone wrote:

Same thing here for the Praetorians.
During deployment, you either follow Embarking rules as a mini movement phase or you don't.
1) Treat it as a mini movement phase and follow all restrictions (which means Triarch Praetorians can't embark, as there is no specific permission for them).
2) Don't treat it as a mini movement phase and allow anything to embark, such as a Wraithknight using a FA Raider as a personal hover board.

Which scenarios seem better, 1 or 2?

Neither, since both are incorrect.

Deployment never tells you to embark, and in fact, we are told you can only embark in the Movement phase, so you have no permission to use that rule, you are actually explicitly restricted from doing so. Either the units are deployed 'inside' the transport, still following the Transport Capacity, if you are on the table, or you declare the unit is embarked on a Transport if you are in reserves.

Next, you are still subject to the Transport Capacity and Monstrous/Gargantuan Creatures do not have permission to be carried by Transports like Infantry do, which Jump Infantry gain by following the rule for Infantry.

And there lies your problem. You're only following part of the Transport Capacity rules, which is the quantity of models allowed inside it. You're completely disregarding how you get inside the transport (Embarking).

 Frozocrone wrote:
And there lies your problem. You're only following part of the Transport Capacity rules, which is the quantity of models allowed inside it. You're completely disregarding how you get inside the transport (Embarking).

You are correct, I am.
Transport Capacity is the quantity of models, and that they are a "single infantry unit".

I am disregarding the embarking rule because I am never told to use it during deployment, and I am explicitly told to only use it during the Movement phase. Instead, I am either told to "deploy 'inside' the Transport" or "declare the unit as embarked".
As a note, this is just a RAW argument and is not HIWPI.

Again, you gloss over the voluntary part.

Please show the general embarking and disembarking rule. Not just the one you have shown.

nosferatu1001 wrote:
Again, you gloss over the voluntary part.

Please show the general embarking and disembarking rule. Not just the one you have shown.

That is both the general EMBARKING AND DISEMBARKING rule, and specifically, the Embarking rule which directly related to embarking and I left out the part about removing them from the table and subsequent Transport movement since it was not relevant to the conversation.

Unless you are complaining I left this out:

EMBARKING AND DISEMBARKING wrote:However, they can embark and be forced to disembark if their Transport is destroyed.

I also specifically spoke about the voluntary part in my post to easysauce.

 Nilok wrote:

 easysauce wrote:


you just said they would start the game "embarked"

so yes, rules forbidding them from embarking most certainly *DO* apply.

you have zero RAW based argument to have a unit be embarked withing a transport when it has a specific restriction on being embarked, regardless of if it embarks pre game or mid game.

there is no way for a unit to get inside any transport without embarking, whenever that embarkation occurs.

Problem, by reading the RAW in that way, you no longer have permission to have your infantry in Transports from reserves since you need to follow all the restrictions for embarking.

Only Infantry models can embark upon Transports (this does not include Jump or Jet Pack Infantry), unless specifically stated otherwise.

Models can only voluntarily embark or disembark in the Movement Phase. They cannot voluntarily embark and disembark in the same turn. However, they can embark and then be forced to disembark if their Transport is destroyed.

By making the direct connection that you have to perform an embarking to be embarked in the rules, you are not allowed to have models embarked in reserves unless specifically told to.
All models are forbidden from embarking voluntarily outside the Movement phase. An example of a forced action, in this case disembarking, is when the Transport is destroyed. Thus, the only time a model can be embarked in a Transport in reserves is when it is forced to be embarked by a rule. If you have a choice of not being embarked, you cannot voluntarily choose to have them embarked.

This however, does not address being deployed 'inside' a Transport if it is already on the table.

Again, this argument turned into a 'past/present' tense argument.

As I have said before, to have climbed a mountain, you must have been climbing. To be embarked on a vehicle, you must have been embarking.

If you want to declare as being 'embarked' on a vehicle, then you violate the embarking rules that forbid Jump Infantry from entering without permission.

If you want to declare they are 'deployed' in the vehicle, then sure. But they aren't allowed to disembark at all - and if that Nightscythe gets blown up, they'll have no where to go, since the rules only refer to embarked models.

I thought it was a mistake returning to this thread - I was right.

Or, you are involutarily embarking as a result of being deployed. You havent addressed that at all

You still cannot provide rules support that a Jump Unit may be Carried either. That continually gets han dwaved, so often that the only assumption that is left is that it cannot be countered.

thus, the only final argument that can possibly be made by the "Jump Infantry can be carried" side, is that it is a dedicated traansport, and the oft-quoted context removed rule that the "only" limitation is the ones given. Of course, that ignores how the rule is contrsucted and presented, and has also been debunked

In short, RAW AND RAI Jump Infatry dont get to be embarked / embarking / carried UNLESS the vehicle SPECIFICALLY allows it.

The NIght scythe does not do so. Case proven.

 Frozocrone wrote:
To have climbed a mountain, you must have been climbing a mountain.

To have eaten a meal, you must have been eating a meal.

The problem is you purposely worded that in a way that it has to read that way which is not how embark and embarking read.

Embark is to be on board a vehicle. Embarking is the act of getting on board said vehicle. For your mountain example to be relevant you would have needed to say.

To be on a mountain, you need to have gotten on the mountain.

For your meal analogy:

To have food in your belly, you must have ingested it.

As this is a game with a defined beginning and end starting something in a position already does not in fact require you to pass through your required steps to get there, you can simply be on the mountain, the food can simply be in your stomach, or in this case on the transport they can just be there. Just like the weapons needing ammo or the vehicles needing fuel we just assume that they start that way. As far as the game is concerned deployment is the start of the unit's existence in the game, there is no before nor are there beginning steps. If there were you would need to take dangerous terrain tests for being deployed in dangerous terrain as you clearly moved there, the same could have been said about jinking in 6th you had clearly moved before.

Nilok wrote:
By making the direct connection that you have to perform an embarking to be embarked in the rules, you are not allowed to have models embarked in reserves unless specifically told to.

Well, you are. The Combined Reserve Unit rules handle that.

All models are forbidden from embarking voluntarily outside the Movement phase. An example of a forced action, in this case disembarking, is when the Transport is destroyed. Thus, the only time a model can be embarked in a Transport in reserves is when it is forced to be embarked by a rule. If you have a choice of not being embarked, you cannot voluntarily choose to have them embarked.

Can you demonstrate where declaring them embarked is voluntary on the model's part?

Now, can you demonstrate how a model voluntarily does anything?

This however, does not address being deployed 'inside' a Transport if it is already on the table.

Which doesn't help much for several reasons. A Night Scythe can never be on the table during deployment since it lacks Hover. If being deployed in to a Transport does not count as embarking, than they cannot disembark, and are stuck inside the Transport till it Explodes or Crashes and Burns.

Problems arise when getting nit-picky about GW rules and ignoring tenses and synonyms.

Frozocrone wrote:Much like MC/Multi Trackers firing two weapons in Overwatch, you have to use existing rules to allow it to happen.

E.g you can either treat Overwatch as a mini shooting phase or not.
1) Treat is as a mini shooting phase and follow all restrictions for it.
2) Don't treat it as a mini shooting phase and allow all weapons to be fired from a single model(so that SM can fire his Bolter, Bolt Pistol and Krak Grenade if he so wishes).

You do know there is a rule preventing more than one weapon being fired in any phase, right? Since these two groups only work in the Shooting Phase, it makes for a poor argument.

Gravmyr wrote:

 Frozocrone wrote:
To have climbed a mountain, you must have been climbing a mountain.

To have eaten a meal, you must have been eating a meal.

The problem is you purposely worded that in a way that it has to read that way which is not how embark and embarking read.

Embark is to be on board a vehicle. Embarking is the act of getting on board said vehicle. For your mountain example to be relevant you would have needed to say.

To be on a mountain, you need to have gotten on the mountain.

For your meal analogy:

To have food in your belly, you must have ingested it.

As this is a game with a defined beginning and end starting something in a position already does not in fact require you to pass through your required steps to get there, you can simply be on the mountain, the food can simply be in your stomach, or in this case on the transport they can just be there. Just like the weapons needing ammo or the vehicles needing fuel we just assume that they start that way. As far as the game is concerned deployment is the start of the unit's existence in the game, there is no before nor are there beginning steps. If there were you would need to take dangerous terrain tests for being deployed in dangerous terrain as you clearly moved there, the same could have been said about jinking in 6th you had clearly moved before.

Not passing through voluntary steps is not in question. It is bypassing the restrictions that is in question.

Can you demonstrate where in the rules it allows us to bypass the restrictions without permission while at the same time bypassing the process?

'Typically, a model can only fire a single shooting weapon in the same phase, although some models, such as vehicles or monstrous creatures can shoot two or more' does not give a boundary. This isn't a rule/restriction, this is informative. It's also a rule locked into the shooting phase, which has no bearing on the assault phase's Overwatch.

The argument comes from when you follow the Shooting Sequence rules for shooting in the assault phase or not, but it doesn't need to be explored here.

Reread through the rules, all of the restrictions are built into the act of embarkation. If you are not embarking and simply embarked then you cannot retroactively apply said restrictions.

Transport Capacity:
# of infantry that can be carried
Entirety embarked
no jump or jet can embark get on not be on
size
special rules on transport (unit restrictions or allowances)

Embarking & Disembarking
Voluntary actions in movement phase
-Embarking
how to embark in movement
how to mark
how to measure

pg 132
Deployment
"Models can be deployed 'inside' buildings,fortifications, or Transport vehiclesin their deployment zone, subject to their Transport Capacity."

pg 135
Combined Reserve Units
"Similarly, you must specify if any units in Reserve are embarked upon a Transport vehicle in Reserve, in which case they will arrive together."

As you can see there is no point where they embark it even specifically states they are deployed embarked. If they had said you embark said units before deployment that would be different as you would be embarking and would have to follow such rules.

Again, past/present tense. I don't need to repeat myself.

Do you require units that start in dangerous terrain to take dangerous terrain tests?

I'll make it easy for you:

pg 108
Dangerous Terrain
"in addition, each model must take a Dangerous Terrain test as soon as it enters, leaves or moves within dangerous terrain."

Only if you move them but that has no bearing on this debate since that's an ingame feature.

Let's take the embarking rules you've posted and how models can only voluntarily embark during the movement phase.

Then, as the deployment rules state, you can deploy units inside Transports if you wish. This is not forced on you, you are not required to do so. This is a completely voluntary action, you can choose to or not to deploy units inside transports.

Show, without referring to Embarking rules, how you can voluntarily embark on vehicles during deployment.

You don't you start embarked as I posted before. Since you are going to try to say you can't be embarked without embarking, without a rule stating this I might add. Give some credence to your stance and tell me how you start in dangerous terrain without entering it.