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.

So it is not written that: "Transport: Devilfish Troop Carrier"?

No one is arguing that the Devilfish is not a transport.

Let me quote Lowinor's post from earlier.

Premise 1: The only existing rule which specifies FOC location of army list entries for Tau lists is in the Tau Empire codex page 24. The criterion (and, it deserves to be stressed, sole criterion) given is which section of the army list the entry is found within.
Premise 2: The Devilfish entry is found within the Troops section.
Conclusion: A Devilfish may be taken as a Troops choice.

Now if you can actually disprove one of the premises, then you've disproved the argument. If you can't then you are just trying to argue that RaW are whatever you think the rules should be.

So basically, put up, or shut up.

i personally think where it is located has no bering on what it is. wave serpents are listed in the elite section of codex:eldar. obviously they are dedicated transports, but not just for elite choices, troops too. i just think it happened to where no elites could take a devilfish so they put it in the troops area to "make sense"

also bringing up the fact that no other tank in the game is listed as a unit type:transport but rather a dedicated transport or a tank and then later says if it can hold troops is important. i mean falcons are listed as a fast, skimmer, tank, and later states it can carry troops. in the land raider section, it lists it as a unit type: tank, and also later states it can carry guys. it seems to me that it would be very odd if they had this ability and no one else did. i know rhinos used to be able to be taken as heavy spots(its what i have been told) but they are completly going away with grey area vehicles. either they are a dedicated transport or not, and if not they are not, then they are not listed as a transport, but have the option of carrying guys, much like an option of equipping a weapon.

You, like others are using one army's codex entry to justify a different army's codex entry. In a RAW argument that just doesn't cut it... You must disprove some elements of the opposing argument if you want to win a RAW discussion. As it stands, Meep is correct in the way the Tau DF rules are written and the way they interact with the BGB- it is a transport that, by RAW, can be taken as a separate FOC entry all by itself. I don't play my Tau this way because personally I don't think that is what was intended (for one thing) and I find that the points DF would use up are far more usefully used taking units that provide more shots from the army (for another thing). That being said, I would not be able to justify denying an opponent of mine, by RAW, if he wanted to bring 6 DF as his troops choices. But in the next edition (5th) that comes out this summer, it looks like it would be scenario suicide to take 6 of them since they won't count as scoring (if rumors are true).

Must my $.02

Edit: grammar

skyth: Apparently people are if they are arguing that the Devilfish is a Troop choice for a Tau army because Army List Entries labeled "Transport: [Insert Vehicle Name Here]" are not HQ/Elite/Troop/Fast Attack/Heavy Support. They are dedicated transports which may only be taken when another unit have them listed as an option under their "Transport" note. Both premises of that quoted argument are false. The transport vehicle rules on P.62 of the rulebook also include rules about which vehicles are dedicated transports. The Devilfish Troop Carrier is not listed in the Troops section of Codex: Tau Empire. It is listed in the "Tranport" sub-section, just like the Chaos Rhino, the Wave Serpent, the Rhino, Razorback, and Drop Pod, and the Trukk are listed in their respective codicies. As huge_eldar points out, whether a Transport choice is included in the page(s) devoted a particular set of Force Organization Chart slots in any codex is irrelevant to the fact that it indicates dedicated transports that may only be taken as part of another Force Organization Chart selection.

Again nurglitch .... the rules on page 62 only tell us how a vehicle is chosen as a dedicated transport and who they can transport. It does not define any unit as a dedicated transport unless it is taken as an upgrade.

All the transport vehicles that you have sighted as evidence that the Devilfish must be a dedicated transport have one thing the devilfish does not. A RULE THAT MAKES THEM DEDICATED TRANSPORTS.

There is no rule that makes Transport:[insert name here] dedicated. You are infering from the rules that are in other army's codexes that the game's writers INTENDED for the devilfish to be a dedicated transport.

Meep357: Yes, by telling us how a vehicle is chosen as a dedicated transport that rule tells us how to tell which transport vehicles in an army list are dedicated transports.

I haven't cited anything but the rules in Codex: Tau Empire as evidence that Devilfish must be dedicated transports. There is sufficient evidence to certify proof in the Codex. I've merely brought up the cases of other Codicies for comparative purposes.

I'm certainly not inferring anything about the intentions of the game's writers. I'm pointing out that it is printed on the page in black and white that Devilfish are dedicated transports. The army list entries of Fire Warrior and Pathfinder teams can take Devilfish as dedicated transports and the information in those army list entries informing us that is labeled 'transport', not 'dedicated transport'. The corresponding transport entry is the Devilfish. The rules on P.62 tell us how to fit this information together, they tell us that the Devilfish is a dedicated transport when they are selected how the dedicated transport of a squad is selected.

The label itself is quite enough, but the fact that the Devilfish is chosen as a transport for teams of Fire Warrirs and Pathfinders, by the rules on P.62 of the Rulebook, removes all reasonable doubt.

Nurglitch- saying the same thing over and over and over ad nauseum does not make your argument correct or valid. This is a RAW discussion. Meep has outlined a RAW argument that is completely supported by the RAW. If you want to prove him wrong you must disprove one of the tenets of his argument. You have not even come close to doing that. Personally I agree with you that the DF should be a dedicated transport and, I in fact, play my Tau that way by choice. But in this RAW discussion Meep is 100% correct. If you want to convince people of your argument, then make a proposition and back it up with rules. The rule you keep quoting does not address Meep's premise and you must show how your theory interacts with the Tau DF in particular (not any other transport) with the rules that the DF has in its entry (and qoute them specifically with reference to how they interact with BGB). Until you do that, you aren't going to get anywhere from a RAW perspective. (BTW- your idea that the TAU codex says they are a "dedicated transport" is just flat wrong- nowhere in the codex does it say the words "dedicated transport").

Edit: spelling

Nurglitch wrote:I'm certainly not inferring anything about the intentions of the game's writers. I'm pointing out that it is printed on the page in black and white that Devilfish are dedicated transports. The army list entries of Fire Warrior and Pathfinder teams can take Devilfish as dedicated transports and the information in those army list entries informing us that is labeled 'transport', not 'dedicated transport'. The corresponding transport entry is the Devilfish. The rules on P.62 tell us how to fit this information together, they tell us that the Devilfish is a dedicated transport when they are selected how the dedicated transport of a squad is selected.

The label itself is quite enough, but the fact that the Devilfish is chosen as a transport for teams of Fire Warrirs and Pathfinders, by the rules on P.62 of the Rulebook, removes all reasonable doubt.

So, are Land Raiders dedicated transports only too, then?

They're transports, they can be taken as dedicated transports by some squads... so by your line of argumentation, they should be dedicated transports only as well, right?

Not that anyone cares what i think since i don't post here, or have any 'street cred' it's a slow day so i figured i would throw in my tuppence

Lowinor wrote:
So, are Land Raiders dedicated transports only too, then?

They're transports, they can be taken as dedicated transports by some squads... so by your line of argumentation, they should be dedicated transports only as well, right?

no the land raider is a Heavy Support choice, that through a special ruling in the CSM codex is allowed to behave like a dedicated transport baring certain restrictions. This is obvious and irrelevant to the discussion of the Devilfish.

Now on to the real matter, i agree with Nurglitch that RAW shows us that the Devilfish is a dedicated transport and can not be taken seperately. It also seems to me a lot of people are having trouble understanding what he is saying, which is why he has to keep repeating himself to everyone.

arguements using only BGB and Codex: Tau Empire:
(this is the part that i think most people are misunderstanding what nurglitch is saying)
BGB pg 62 "Sometimes a unit entry in a Codex book will include a transport option, allowing a vehicle to be selected along with the unit. These transport vehicles are directly assigned to that particular unit and are known as dedicated transports."

that above not only defines who can take a dedicated transport, but also what a dedicated transport is. a unit entry might include a transport option, these transports are known as dedicated transports. The devilfish is listed as a transport option for fire warriors and pathfinders it is therefore defined as a dedicated transport.

BGB pg 62 "Other transport vehicles are chosen separately and occupy a Force Organization Chart slot.."

'Other' means it's referring to transports that do not meet the above criteria,ie vehicles that can carry units but are not listed as a transport option for units. The Devilfish, since it is already mentioned in relation to the previous sentence, is therefore not one of the these 'other transports'

Tau Codex:
pg 36: The Devilfish is listed as "Transport" as the FoC type. It may be in the Troop section, however it is listed as Transport. Every other unit in the tau codex is listed under the appropriate FoC slot (HQ/Elite/Troops/Fast Attack/Heavy Support)


a. vehicles listed as a transport option for units are dedicated transports.
b. other vehicles exists that can transport units and they take up an FOC.
c. the Devilfish is listed as a "Transport" not a Troops" choice in the codex

that should be enough black and white for it to be seen that the Devilfish can only be taken as a dedicated transport.

now for non RAW arguments as other supportive clues.
The Land Raider 'argument':
The land raider should (by my point 'a') be a dedicated transport, however it is given a special ruling spelled out in the SM Codex that allows it to break these rules. This is a common practise in WH40k it is a restrictive game and rules are writen to overwrite other rules in special circumstances. Since this rule exists it is not related to the Devilfish arguement.

The Eldar Falcon:
It is not listed as a transport option and therefore falls under 'b' one of the 'other' units that can transport units. since this falls under 'b' it is irrelevant to any rulings on the devilfish.

Over all Book layout:
in he SM codex transports are given as a sub section of troops. You can tell this due to the difference in the font size of the headder. in the Sm codex HQ/Elite/Troops/Fast Attack/Heavy Support all have the same size font, Transports is done a smaller font making it a sub section. This is similar to how the Devilfish is done as a 'transport' type in the Troops section. These is no argument that the vehicles listed in the sub section of SM can be taken separately. This is also simlar to the Wave Serpent in Eldar. It is listed in a all Transport block in the Elite section of the codex, it is once again a transport done as a sub section of a larger section that included the first occurance of it's function as a transport.

Page flow
look at the entirety of pages in the tau codex, with specific reference to the Army list pages. There is no other section that the Devilfish could be listed in that would not result in an entire page having to be added to the codex. Due to the size of the kroot entry on the following page. It would have looked worse if that entry had been broken up to two pages so that the Devilfish entry would not be in the middle of the Troops section, hence why the Devilfish is specifically designated "Transport" in there to distinguish it form the actual Troops choices. and for people who think this doesn't matter, the number of pages in manuals such as this are taken into account. They are expensed per length, so throwing in a whole extra page for once vehicle is financially unsound.

Your argument doesn't follow from the rules. You are trying to twist the rules to say what you want them to say. I would love for it to be RAW that Devilfish are defined as always dedicated, but they're not.

Beast wrote:Nurglitch- saying the same thing over and over and over ad nauseum does not make your argument correct or valid.

No, but repeating the correct and only valid argument over and over is a way of catapulting the propaganda, so to speak.

Beast wrote:This is a RAW discussion. Meep has outlined a RAW argument that is completely supported by the RAW. If you want to prove him wrong you must disprove one of the tenets of his argument. You have not even come close to doing that.

I certainly have 'disproved' both the premises of the argument, although the technical term would be 'falsified'. I have shown that the rules on P.62 are relevant to the matter of what is a dedicated transport in the Tau Empire Codex. I have shown that the Tau Empire Codex contains the necessary information for Devilfish to be a dedicated transport. I have not done so through traditional "RAW" discussion because traditional RAW discussion is an error theory for working with rules and hence eminently ignorable. Fortunately there is an effective method for 'proving' that the Devilfish Troop Carrier is a dedicated transport, and I have done that. Whether or not people can follow it is irrelevant to what it proves.

Beast wrote:Personally I agree with you that the DF should be a dedicated transport and, I in fact, play my Tau that way by choice. But in this RAW discussion Meep is 100% correct. If you want to convince people of your argument, then make a proposition and back it up with rules.

I have no interest in convincing anyone of anything. Either they are interested in addressing the facts of the matter, in which case they will convince themselves insofar as they wish to be rational and remind themselves to occasionally wonder whether the reasoning they subscribe to is incorrect or incomplete, or they will attempt to 'win' the argument by committing fallacies such as appeal to prejudice and popularity. Either way, the only important thing is to apply an effective method for extracting the salient information from the rules and checking it for validity and completeness.

Beast wrote:The rule you keep quoting does not address Meep's premise and you must show how your theory interacts with the Tau DF in particular (not any other transport) with the rules that the DF has in its entry (and qoute them specifically with reference to how they interact with BGB). Until you do that, you aren't going to get anywhere from a RAW perspective. (BTW- your idea that the TAU codex says they are a "dedicated transport" is just flat wrong- nowhere in the codex does it say the words "dedicated transport").

That is incorrect, which is odd since I have explained how the rules I've quoted are to be read and no one had pointed out any errors in my exegesis despite stating that my conclusion is wrong. Since one can either identify a premise as false and thus show that the premises of an argument are not true, or identify invalidity in reasoning and thus show that the conclusion does not follow from the premises, and no one has yet done that despite claiming the conclusion to be unsound I have no reason to consider the work I have checked myself to be incorrect. And since that work has true premises, unlike the counter-veiling arguments I have checked and found wanting, I have satisfied the reasonable doubt that may be attached to the conclusion that the rules tell us that Devilfish are dedicated transports.

wynforth: Any attachment of 'street cred' to one's argument is a fallacy either of popularity or authority. An argument is judged on grounds other than those used to judge the persons putting it forth.

And you have been unable to put an argument saying that Devilfish are solely dedicated transports. Only thing that you've proven with your argument is that they CAN BE dedicated transports. No one is disputing that.

Beast wrote:Nurglitch- saying the same thing over and over and over ad nauseum does not make your argument correct or valid. This is a RAW discussion. Meep has outlined a RAW argument that is completely supported by the RAW. If you want to prove him wrong you must disprove one of the tenets of his argument. You have not even come close to doing that. Personally I agree with you that the DF should be a dedicated transport and, I in fact, play my Tau that way by choice. But in this RAW discussion Meep is 100% correct. If you want to convince people of your argument, then make a proposition and back it up with rules. The rule you keep quoting does not address Meep's premise and you must show how your theory interacts with the Tau DF in particular (not any other transport) with the rules that the DF has in its entry (and qoute them specifically with reference to how they interact with BGB). Until you do that, you aren't going to get anywhere from a RAW perspective. (BTW- your idea that the TAU codex says they are a "dedicated transport" is just flat wrong- nowhere in the codex does it say the words "dedicated transport").

I agree with Beast. Just post the RULES AS WRITTEN, and there will be no discussion anymore.

Quoting the RAW is the right way, not inferring RAI.

I hate the rule, personally, but in no way does that mean that the RAW is any less valid.

One other thing .... I know that this is going to get me some flack (for some reason people just don't seem to like the red shirts).

All the Red Shirts I've spoken to have conceded that the devilfish isn't a dedicated transport as per RAW; however they've all said that they don't think that's the way it was meant to be.

I will say that I also feel that the devilfish SHOULD be a dedicated transport .... it just sucks that that's not the way it is under RAW.

skyth wrote:And you have been unable to put an argument saying that Devilfish are solely dedicated transports. Only thing that you've proven with your argument is that they CAN BE dedicated transports.

I not only have been able to put forth the argument that Devilfish are dedicated transports, I have repeated it over and over. Should I repeat it again?

akira5665 wrote:I agree with Beast. Just post the RULES AS WRITTEN, and there will be no discussion anymore.

I've done that. I've quoted the rules and received the bizarre response that those rules do not state what they do.

Rulebook. P.62. "Who Can Use A Transport Vehicle":

"Sometimes a unit entry in a Codex book will include a transport option, allowing a vehicle to be selected along with the unit. These transport vehicles are directly assigned to that particular unit and are known as dedicated transports."

This rule tells us that some transports are dedicated transports.

"Other transport vehicles are chosen separately and occupy a Force Organisation chart slot (for example, Eldar Falcons), and can be used to provide ad hoc transportation to any unit that can embark on it."

This rule tells us that some transport vehicles are not dedicated transport vehicles.

So if some transport vehicles are not dedicated transport vehicles, and some transport vehicles are dedicated transport vehicles, what distinguishes one from another?

These rules tell us that all transport vehicles have the passenger capacity. And transport vehicles that are not dedicated transport vehicles are not included as another unit's transport option. We know that because the rules tell us that non-dedicated transport vehicles are "other" than the units chosen as transport options for other units.

In Codex: Tau Empire, which units have transport options, as described on P.24 of that book? Fire Warrior Teams (P.36) and Pathfinder Teams (P.38) each have the transport 'option' of taking a Devilfish troop carrier. The Devilfish Troop Carrier Army List Entry notes that it is a transport option, as it falls under the heading "Transport: Devilfish Troop Carrier" (P.36) The Devilfish Troop Carrier is a transport option for units in the Tau Empire Army List. This is because they are listed as a transport option for Fire Warrior Teams and transport 'option' (requirement) for Pathfinder Teams, and they are listed as a transport rather than an independent unit like all the independent units in Codex: Tau Empire.

The Fire Warrior Team, Devilfish, and Pathfinder Team all satisfy the requirements for a transport vehicle to be a dedicated transport vehicle of another unit, they have "Devilfish" listed as their transport option as per P.24. Codex Tau Empire has no additional rules providing an exception, as exist for the Land Raider in Codex Space Marines. They are dedicated transport vehicles and according to the rules for transport vehicles on P.62 of the rulebook may not be chosen independently of those units they are an option for.

Ok. Let us cut through the garbage and get to a definateve answer. got your codex handy.

The whole arguement revolves around thae fact that the Devilfish is listed in the same format as the troops, not in a seperate box unlike most transports.

- I say most because the Rhino and Razorback are also similarly formatted.

However that is not relevant.


THE DEVILFISH IS "CLEARLY" ANNOTATED AS A TRANSPORT.


Look at the grey lettering on the sidebar, yes the one with the erroneous troops symbol.

It says 'Transport'.

Look through the whole codex. Listed in completion to deny all arguements.

Commander = H.Q.
Bodyguard = H.Q.
Ethereal = H.Q.
Crisis = Elites
Stealth = Elites
Fire Warrior = Troops
Devilfish = Transport
Kroot = Troops
Gun Drones = Fast Attack
Pathfinders = Fast Attack
Piranhas = Fast Attack
Vespid = Fast Attack
Broadside = Heavy Support
Sniper Drones = Heavy Support
Hammerhead = Heavy Support
Sky Ray = Heavy Support


Devilfish are listed as transports, in greytone and they didn't put a box around it. End of discussion.

If that was the end of the discussion, this thread would have been over on the first page, when I first pointed that out...

Nurglitch wrote:Rulebook. P.62. "Who Can Use A Transport Vehicle":

"Sometimes a unit entry in a Codex book will include a transport option, allowing a vehicle to be selected along with the unit. These transport vehicles are directly assigned to that particular unit and are known as dedicated transports."

This rule tells us that some transports are dedicated transports.

"Other transport vehicles are chosen separately and occupy a Force Organisation chart slot (for example, Eldar Falcons), and can be used to provide ad hoc transportation to any unit that can embark on it."

This rule tells us that some transport vehicles are not dedicated transport vehicles.

So if some transport vehicles are not dedicated transport vehicles, and some transport vehicles are dedicated transport vehicles, what distinguishes one from another?

What seperates a dedicated transport from a non dedicated transport? The rules that the transport has. Geez .... it's not that hard.

Nurglitch wrote:These rules tell us that all transport vehicles have the passenger capacity. And transport vehicles that are not dedicated transport vehicles are not included as another unit's transport option. We know that because the rules tell us that non-dedicated transport vehicles are "other" than the units chosen as transport options for other units.

In Codex: Tau Empire, which units have transport options, as described on P.24 of that book? Fire Warrior Teams (P.36) and Pathfinder Teams (P.38) each have the transport 'option' of taking a Devilfish troop carrier. The Devilfish Troop Carrier Army List Entry notes that it is a transport option, as it falls under the heading "Transport: Devilfish Troop Carrier" (P.36) The Devilfish Troop Carrier is a transport option for units in the Tau Empire Army List. This is because they are listed as a transport option for Fire Warrior Teams and transport 'option' (requirement) for Pathfinder Teams, and they are listed as a transport rather than an independent unit like all the independent units in Codex: Tau Empire.

Using this logic the SM & CSM Land Raider is a dedicated transport. SM Codex pg 30 says that a Terminator Command Squad may take a Land Raider as a transport, pg 31 says that the Terminator & Assault Terminator squads may also take a Land Raider as a dedicated transport. CSM Codex on page 94 it states that CSM Terminators can take a Land Raider as a transport option. Therfore the CSM Land Raider is a dedicated transport? I think not.

Nurglitch wrote:The Fire Warrior Team, Devilfish, and Pathfinder Team all satisfy the requirements for a transport vehicle to be a dedicated transport vehicle of another unit, they have "Devilfish" listed as their transport option as per P.24. Codex Tau Empire has no additional rules providing an exception, as exist for the Land Raider in Codex Space Marines. They are dedicated transport vehicles and according to the rules for transport vehicles on P.62 of the rulebook may not be chosen independently of those units they are an option for.

Have you read the Land Raider rules? The only exception rule that the Land Radier has is that it may still count as a scoring unit. pg 35 "Land Raiders may be selected by some units as dedicated transports. Because Land Raidders are such formidable vehicles they do not count as dedicated transports for the purposes of holding objectives and scoring victory points. Treat them as vehicles instead." (emphasis mine) That rule says that a Land Raider, as taken as a dedicated transport, follows all the rules for a dedicated transport (i.e. doesn't take up a foc slot) EXCEPT for the one that says they're non-scoring.

This is why pointing to the Land Raider is not helpful to your argument.

Orlanth wrote:The whole arguement revolves around thae fact that the Devilfish is listed in the same format as the troops, not in a seperate box unlike most transports.

- I say most because the Rhino and Razorback are also similarly formatted.

THE DEVILFISH IS "CLEARLY" ANNOTATED AS A TRANSPORT.


Look at the grey lettering on the sidebar, yes the one with the erroneous troops symbol.

It says 'Transport'.

Look through the whole codex. Listed in completion to deny all arguements.

Commander = H.Q.
Bodyguard = H.Q.
Ethereal = H.Q.
Crisis = Elites
Stealth = Elites
Fire Warrior = Troops
Devilfish = Transport
Kroot = Troops
Gun Drones = Fast Attack
Pathfinders = Fast Attack
Piranhas = Fast Attack
Vespid = Fast Attack
Broadside = Heavy Support
Sniper Drones = Heavy Support
Hammerhead = Heavy Support
Sky Ray = Heavy Support

Devilfish are listed as transports, in greytone and they didn't put a box around it. End of discussion.

No the whole argument is based around the fact that the Devilfish, unlike the rihno, doesn't have a rule that means it doesn't occupy a FOC slot, ever, and must always be taken as a dedicated transport. The formatting of the page has nothing to do with it.

No one is debating that the Devil Fish is a Transport. As for the "erronous troops symbol". I didn't know you worked for GW and catagorically state that that is an error. GW has nowhere stated that it is an error (if you think they have please provide a link). Now as GW has not stated that this is an error, we must treat it as if it is not. Again I remind you of the rule on page 62 which states: "Other transport vehicles are chosen separately and occupy a Force Organisation chart slot (for example, Eldar Falcons), and can be used to provide ad hoc transportation to any unit that can embark on it." Other transport vehicles - so those vehicles (transports included) not chosen as a dedicated transport. Note it says "other transports", it doesn't say "other vehicles which can transport infantry". Now clearly the Devil Fish is a transport, it clearly does NOT have a rule limiting its usage to dedicated duties (like the rhino, razor back, wave serpent, trukk & every other transport out there), it is clearly labeled as a transport in the troops section. Therefore when taken as a non dedicated transport, using the above rule, it uses a Troops FOC slot.

The problem is the rules on page 62 are DO NOT STATE which Transports are dedicated and which one's aren't. We can INFER that the game designers INTENDED for transports to be didicated ... however that's not the RULES AS WRITTEN. Under the current RULES AS WRITTEN you must look at the rules each transport has to determine their status as dedicated or non-dedicated. Unless GW comes out with a FAQ correcting their "errors" (troops symbol, no dedicated rule) then this is the way the RAW will stay.

Is feilding a DF as a troops choice a good thing? No
Is it a smart way to play the game? Probably not
Do I (& the majority of Tau players) play this way? No
Is it the way the rules are inteneded? No
Is it the way the rules are written? Yes

Is this a stupid argument? Yes

This is why I don't like pure RAW. I don't play pure RAW. Hell nobody I've ever played against, or seen play has ever played by PURE RAW.

I've seen this argument many many times. Neither side wins. We may as well agree to dissagree .... because for the last several posts all that's happened is both sides have mearly reapeated their arguments over and over. That does nothing but frustrate everyone.

My final thought on this is - If someone fields a Devilfish as a non-dedicated transport, you can use Nurglitch's argument to point out that the game designers did not INTEND for you to take a devilfish as a non-dedicated transport. Unfortunatley it doesn't go any further than that. If your opponent then chooses to ignore that intention and play the rules the way they're written - then DON'T PLAY THEM. You'll probably end up having a massive rules argument (about a different rule) with them durring game play.

Meep357 wrote:What seperates a dedicated transport from a non dedicated transport? The rules that the transport has. Geez .... it's not that hard.

What separates dedicated transport vehicles from non-dedicated transport vehicles is that the former are transport choices for other units and non-dedicated transport vehicles are not.

Meep357 wrote:Using this logic the SM & CSM Land Raider is a dedicated transport. SM Codex pg 30 says that a Terminator Command Squad may take a Land Raider as a transport, pg 31 says that the Terminator & Assault Terminator squads may also take a Land Raider as a dedicated transport. CSM Codex on page 94 it states that CSM Terminators can take a Land Raider as a transport option. Therfore the CSM Land Raider is a dedicated transport? I think not.

That's why the rules prefacing the Transport section of the Codex: Space Marine army list point out and explain the exceptions pertaining to the dedicated transport rule where the Land Raider is concerned. The exceptions are that the Land Raider is not necessarily a dedicated transport vehicle, and only when chosen as such, and when chosen as such counts as a scoring unit. There are no such exceptions for the Devilfish in Codex: Tau Empire.

Meep357 wrote:Have you read the Land Raider rules? The only exception rule that the Land Radier has is that it may still count as a scoring unit. pg 35 "Land Raiders may be selected by some units as dedicated transports. Because Land Raidders are such formidable vehicles they do not count as dedicated transports for the purposes of holding objectives and scoring victory points. Treat them as vehicles instead." (emphasis mine) That rule says that a Land Raider, as taken as a dedicated transport, follows all the rules for a dedicated transport (i.e. doesn't take up a foc slot) EXCEPT for the one that says they're non-scoring.

Yes, I have read those rule and correctly as well. As I pointed out above, read correctly the rule about Land Raiders in the Transport section of the Space Marine list points out, in part, that Land Raiders may be selected as dedicated transports, and thus are an exception to Army List Entries that are only selected as dedicated transports.

Meep357 wrote:This is why pointing to the Land Raider is not helpful to your argument.

As I have pointed out, that is incorrect.

If the point that the Devilfish is a Transport is not contested, then it follows that the rules applying to transports, and thus dedicated transports, applies to the Devilfish. There is a rule on P.62 of the rulebook stating this:

Rulebook. P.62. "Who Can Use A Transport Vehicle":

"Sometimes a unit entry in a Codex book will include a transport option, allowing a vehicle to be selected along with the unit. These transport vehicles are directly assigned to that particular unit and are known as dedicated transports."

So is there a unit entry in a Codex book that includes a transport option, allowing a vehicle to be selected along with the unit?

Yes, there are two entries in Codex: Tau Empire that include a transport option, allowing a vehicle to be selected along with these units, the Fire Warrior Team (P.36) and the Pathfinder Team (P.38). That transport option is listed as "a Devilfish troop carrier" in both entries.

This transport vehicle, the Devilfish troop carrier, is known as a dedicated transport.

Whether this is the intention of the writer is irrelevant. This is what the rules state. Feel free to play it otherwise, but don't kid yourself that the rules say anything but that the Devilfish is a dedicated transport.

It is a little know fact that an argument about rules was the start of the HORUS HERESY!!!111!!

First off, it's bad taste to label someone else's quote as being from someone else.

Second off, you still haven't proven that a Devilfish is only a dedicated transport. You've proven that it CAN BE a dedicated transport, but you have yet to prove that it is only a dedicated transport.

Simply repeating the same thing over and over again when it doesn't say what you say it says doesn't help.

skyth: Presumably you're addressing me, so where have I misquoted anyone?

Also, I have proven that a Devilfish is only a dedicated transport. I've cited the rule on P.62, and the information on P.36 and 38 to that effect. That rule on P.62 says that dedicated transports can only be dedicated transports.

"Sometimes a unit entry in a Codex book will include a transport option, allowing a vehicle to be selected along with the unit. These transport vehicles are directly assigned to that particular unit and are known as dedicated transports. Other transport vehicles are chosen separately and occupy a Force Organisation chart slot (for example, Eldar Falcons), and can be used to provide ad hoc transportation to any unit that can embark on it."

This rule tells us that dedicated transport vehicles are not chosen separately from other army list entries, and do not occupy a Force Organisation chart slot.

What, in the Tau codex, denotes a selection as being a troop? Is it that
a) the entry is listed in the "troops" section, or that
b) the entry has the word "troops" written on its sidebar?

If the answer is (a), then the devilfish can itself be a troop choice. It is both a troop and a transport. If the answer is (b), the devilfish is a transport instead of a troop and so can be taken only as a dedicated transport.

As far as I can tell, the RaW do not tell us what criterion to use to make this determination. The rest of the codices are sufficiently clear in their wording and layout that this does not come up. Since the RaW do not state which criterion to use to identify a troop choice -- section or sidebar -- it is going to be a matter of player call no matter what. It's a shame that this wasn't addressed in the Tau FAQ.

Nurglitch wrote:

skyth wrote:I agree with Beast. Just post the RULES AS WRITTEN, and there will be no discussion anymore.

I've done that. I've quoted the rules and received the bizarre response that those rules do not state what they do.

I never posted what you quoted me as posting.

skyth: I've correction the attribution of that quotation. Thank you for bringing that to my attention.

shirou: Whatever RAW says the rules themselves tell us how to determine whether a vehicle is a transport vehicle that occupies a Force Organization Chart slot, or whether a vehicle is a dedicated transport for a squad. On P.62 the rules tell us that if a transport vehicle is a transport option for another unit, then it is a dedicated transport. It is not listed in the Troop section of the Codex, it is a Transport. Codex: Tau Empire is sufficiently clear in its expression of the rules that this should not even be in question amongst literate people.

RAW is what it is and it contradicts you Nurglitch. I'm tired of wasting time by flogging this horse that has been dead for several months now... I suggest you go back and read the previous threads on this topic if they are still active. Your argument holds no water in relation to the BGB and DF rules in Codex: Tau Empire. That has been clearly and definitively demonstrated by Meep in his post. You actually have not falsified or disproven any part of his premise. We all want DF to be dedicated transports and we all think they should be dedicated transports, but wanting the rules to say something does not mean they actually do.

Beast: That is incorrect. The rules clearly state that Devilfish are dedicated transports. Any arguments reaching a contradictory conclusion are unsound, either because they are premised on false statements as Meep357's argument is, or made with invalid reasoning.

Meep357 has not only failed to clearly and definitively demonstrate the soundness of his argument, but has also shown his premises to be false, and thus demonstrated his argument to be unsound and thus eminently disproven. And unlike you and Meep357, I have actually demonstrated these things rather than merely declaring them. Simply saying that I have not when I have done so is dishonest.

I don't care what people want the Devilfish to be, as what people want is irrelevant to the meaning of words. I'm pointing out what the rules say to those who are either unable, or unwilling, to read them properly. It just so happens that the rules say that Devilfish are dedicated transports, and since the rules say that clearly and unambiguously.

As for myself I have made a commitment to telling the truth as part of my training, and my experience in teaching critical thinking and logic has shown me that patience is required when explaining things to recalcitrant interlocators. Thus I am neither tired of promulgating the truth, nor tired of refuting the untruths clouding the truth.

Nurglitch wrote:If that was the end of the discussion, this thread would have been over on the first page, when I first pointed that out...

Actually you pointed something else out, the title. The grey lettering on the sides is the only definative labelling, because it is used to describe EVERY unit in the main codex misting. As described above. There is no getting away from it. The title 'Transport: Devilfish' et al isnt quite so clear.

Stick to the verticle grey text and you cannot be argued against, well they can try, but its not worth answering as the grey text is consistent thoughout.