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.

KingCracker wrote:Are you going to add something to threads instead of surf for ones I posted in and bash anything I say? It would be a nice change of pace. I was simply adding my opinion on why I think said rule does or does not work. I wasnt throwing a lure out for you to explain why anything I say is not worthy of threads. Im pretty sure I never stepped on your toes to warrant the BS Ive been catching from you lately. So Id appreciate if you would stop the gak

Stop making everything personal, seriously. If you publicly post things about Ork rules that are brazenly incorrect or based on bad information, even if they're just 'opinions', then expect me or any number of people to correct you.
I'm not picking on you personally for any reason in this thread, I'm picking on your posted stances on an issue in a completely calm and logical manner.
Defend your positions equally calmly or logically, don't just complain about the people attacking them being a conspiracy to discredit you.

Iron_Chaos_Brute wrote:
@Kingcracker: Snikrot's rule says "Snikrot and his unit." An IC may be attached to a unit held in reserve (like Snikrot's unit), at which point it becomes part of the unit. Snikrot then tries to arrive by a non-normal means. He's not outflanking or DSing, so the attached IC doesn't activate either prohibition. He's using Ambush!, so you follow the Ambush! rule without referring to infiltrate, outflank, or any of the other USR's.

Exactly.

I think yes gazzy can get FNP from a painboy if he joins the squad with said painboy. Why is this?. because the painboy fixes up guy guys . he is basically a medic for the ork and has a piece of gear that allows him to fix guys.

Now on the Ambush being confered to gazzy if he is in snikrnots group. To me it is also obvious that Snikrot can only join kommando's because he is basically taking the slot of the kommando nob. Since he can only be part of a kommando unit only the kommando's with him get the ability to ambush.

Also The BGB says IC's can join a unit by moving into coherency with that unit Or starting in coherency with that unit.

^There is nothing saying it can only effect snik+kommandos, please stop blatantly inventing rules that arent there.

And as stated earlier snikrots ambush is not a universal special rule, so there is no way for it to be lost or not conferred, if you are confused as to what the USRS are please turn to page 74 of the brb and read up

Lord_Ghazghkull wrote:I think yes gazzy can get FNP from a painboy if he joins the squad with said painboy. Why is this?. because the painboy fixes up guy guys . he is basically a medic for the ork and has a piece of gear that allows him to fix guys.

What? This sounds like a "Well, it makes sense..." argument. Please see my post on the bottom of pg. 1.

Now on the Ambush being confered to gazzy if he is in snikrnots group. To me it is also obvious that Snikrot can only join kommando's because he is basically taking the slot of the kommando nob. Since he can only be part of a kommando unit only the kommando's with him get the ability to ambush.

Snikrot doesn't "join" a unit, he's part of the unit. See my post on the bottom of pg. 1 for why you are wrong. (It's also quoted directly above your post).

Also The BGB says IC's can join a unit by moving into coherency with that unit Or starting in coherency with that unit.

Or being declared to be attached to a unit in reserve

I'm so sad that we aren't allowed to use "Protip" anymore

Actually on the Sniktrot and IC stuff looking at page 48 top right and 94 about halfway down on the left leads me to seriously doubt the RAW argument for snikrot - anyone want to allay my worry?.
The IC becomes part of the unit via coherent deployment onto the board it's only considered 'with the unit' for the reserve roll and they arrive together "becoming part of the unit by being deployed in coherency". One can't actually deploy any ork IC from *any* table edge so he can't be deployed in coherency with the from the back of the board kommandos.

RAI and RAW points are allowed according to the YMDC tenets but not as arguments against each other. Be careful not to denounce RAI, confusing it with "real world examples" which are against the tenets. My position is always RAI as opposed to RAW.

Iron_Chaos_Brute wrote:

Lord_Ghazghkull wrote:I think yes gazzy can get FNP from a painboy if he joins the squad with said painboy. Why is this?. because the painboy fixes up guy guys . he is basically a medic for the ork and has a piece of gear that allows him to fix guys.

What? This sounds like a "Well, it makes sense..." argument. Please see my post on the bottom of pg. 1.

Now on the Ambush being confered to gazzy if he is in snikrnots group. To me it is also obvious that Snikrot can only join kommando's because he is basically taking the slot of the kommando nob. Since he can only be part of a kommando unit only the kommando's with him get the ability to ambush.

Snikrot doesn't "join" a unit, he's part of the unit. See my post on the bottom of pg. 1 for why you are wrong. (It's also quoted directly above your post).

Snikrot is an UPGRADE instead of a nob you take him.. so he is actually leading the unit like say a vet Sgt . you take him and he leads kommando's . you dont have to take him.. but if you do he joins your kommandos in the NOB SLOT. how is that confusing? and also how can a special char be part of a unit without first joining it?. also its obvious that ambush only works with commandos because it says " snikrot and his unit may instead come on from any table edge (instead of just the sides)" and yes the parentheses are what i think of when read the rules for snikrot

Also The BGB says IC's can join a unit by moving into coherency with that unit Or starting in coherency with that unit.

Or being declared to be attached to a unit in reserve

I'm so sad that we aren't allowed to use "Protip" anymore

ChrisCP wrote:Actually on the Sniktrot and IC stuff looking at page 48 top right and 94 about halfway down on the left leads me to seriously doubt the RAW argument for snikrot - anyone want to allay my worry?.
The IC becomes part of the unit via coherent deployment onto the board it's only considered 'with the unit' for the reserve roll and they arrive together "becoming part of the unit by being deployed in coherency". One can't actually deploy any ork IC from *any* table edge so he can't be deployed in coherency with the from the back of the board kommandos.

In the reserves rules it says that IC may be declared as a part of a unit in reserve and that for all intents and purposes it is one unit. Am I wrong?
so if you read snikrots rule it says: "Snikrot's mastery of guerilla tactics is legendary. If the owning player chooses, Snikrot AND HIS UNIT may be held in reserve. When Snikrot AND HIS UNIT become available from reserve, they may move on from any table edge."
so assuming that Gazzy was declared as apart of that unit and in reserve before the game then he may move with the rest of HIS UNIT from any table edge as snikrots rule dictates.

I should have stated that I play fun games, never a win at all costs type, and so try to make common sense on how some of these rules are played. Yes looking at how its written, Ghaz certainly can benefit from how the ambush rule is written. But personally that is clearly rules abuse, even tho how it is written can be used that way. It makes absolutely no sense how Ghaz, or anything in mega armor could in all respects sneak behind the enemy lines and ambush them.
Thats just how I play. So my comment earlier was agree with the ones that say you couldnt do that, because of how I play it. And yea GorkaMorka, I take what you say a bit personal. I never take peoples responses personal, but thats normally because those I have had a disagreement with, usually ends there. But seeing as for the last week or so, you have not only never dropped anything, nor tried to sound like a friendly disagreement, but you seem to have done this to things Ive said a few different subjects. So I think Im in the right to feel like youve got some personal thing against me.

I love to play fun games and i would never run Gazzy with snikrot because it seems ridiculous like you said. i was mearly pointing out what was written for the sake of this thread. although the thought of watching my mate cry when gaz and snikrot rock up behind his dudes is almost worth the argument ;P

I think things like that, I call them "dick moves", are saved for people that deserve that abuse. But like I said, I play friendly games, with no rules abuse. I really need to put THAT in my sig once the deff rolla petition runs out this month lol.

by that token you can call anyone following any rule as written a dick move, oh you took vulkan and all your melta is TL? wow what a dick move, omg avatar makes everything in 12" fearless? wow what a dick move etc etc

grankobot wrote:

Being fair i personally do feel that both effect the unit (including joined IC) ...

I think it's pretty clear that it should be neither. Special rules aren't conferred upon joining characters unless specifically mentioned - period.

The INAT does its best to shore up GW rules but in order to do this they often change the rules to their personal beliefs. 90% of the time what they do makes the game better according to the authors.

Deliberately changing the rules for a competitive environment is bull. See the stores that arbitrarily decided that deffrollas could ram vehicles, vs the stores that didn't. Which ones sent ork players to the finals and which ones didn't? If it's not universal, it shouldn't be in tournaments at all. If it's not in a GW sanctioned article, it won't be universal.

It's a fine line between rules changes "for clarification" and made up junk like the imaginary distinction between snikrot and painboyz.

The big problem with what you said is that there is that the rulebook both agrees and disagrees with what you are saying. It says that infiltrate is not conferred to a unit that does not already have it, because the special ability does not say it is given to a IC. While right after it says that the special ability called stubborn is conferred because the rule states that it is conferred to the whole unit. This is the exact same wording that is used for ambush. I have already posted about the Ghaz+snikrot thing and It was locked to prevent arguing. I think the INAT ruling, as Yakface has stated many times, is based leaning toward conservative rulings. Still I think its still up in the air.

Gold tooth Jerry wrote:
It says that infiltrate is not conferred to a unit that does not already have it, because the special ability does not say it is given to a IC. While right after it says that the special ability called stubborn is conferred because the rule states that it is conferred to the whole unit. This is the exact same wording that is used for ambush.

No, it isn't.
The stubborn example involves conferring the rule to the joined unit.
Infiltrate is stopped by a non-infiltrating IC because the IC is not conferred the infiltrate USR simply for joining a unit with it, and the rule says 'units with this rule'.

Ambush isn't conferring a rule to the IC or unit, and doesn't require that the whole unit have any special rule to use it.
It is an ability specific to Snikrot... I don't see any reason a joined IC cannot benefit from it. The rules surrounding ICs gaining special rules don't apply.

Burto89 wrote:

ChrisCP wrote:Actually on the Sniktrot and IC stuff looking at page 48 top right and 94 about halfway down on the left leads me to seriously doubt the RAW argument for snikrot - anyone want to allay my worry?.
The IC becomes part of the unit via coherent deployment onto the board it's only considered 'with the unit' for the reserve roll and they arrive together "becoming part of the unit by being deployed in coherency". One can't actually deploy any ork IC from *any* table edge so he can't be deployed in coherency with the from the back of the board kommandos.

In the reserves rules it says that IC may be declared as a part of a unit in reserve and that for all intents and purposes it is one unit. Am I wrong?
so if you read snikrots rule it says: "Snikrot's mastery of guerilla tactics is legendary. If the owning player chooses, Snikrot AND HIS UNIT may be held in reserve. When Snikrot AND HIS UNIT become available from reserve, they may move on from any table edge."
so assuming that Gazzy was declared as apart of that unit and in reserve before the game then he may move with the rest of HIS UNIT from any table edge as snikrots rule dictates.

No it never says such a thing (where to people keep summoning these huge sweeping statements from? Do they even read the rule book?), I provided the page references for everyone so they could look at this ones-self, but seeming as many don't have a rulebook (on hand at least) I'll try to break it down a little bit more for you.

"if any of their independent characters left in reserve are joining a unit, in which case they will be rolled for and will arrive together"

Arriving from reserves
"when a unit is arriving from reserve it must move on from the players own table edge (unless it's deepstriking or outflanking)." rest of that paragraph is about moving on the right amount.

So as I said earlier at no point is the IC joined to the unit while they are in reserve, they arrive together at which point they can join the unit by moving into or being deployed in coherency.

An IC is not part of the Kommando unit, so the can't move on from any edge, meaning although they can arrive together, they can not be deployed in coherence so are not joining snikt on your opponents table edge, nothing stopping you doing it from your edge however. And yes I can see some Smart-Alec saying ‘well I understand arriving together as being joined to the unit’ but again that is your take on the rule not what it actually says, there being no mention of arriving counting as joined so some such and it’s also quite clear on the co0nditions for how an IC joins a unit.

kill dem stunties wrote:by that token you can call anyone following any rule as written a dick move, oh you took vulkan and all your melta is TL? wow what a dick move, omg avatar makes everything in 12" fearless? wow what a dick move etc etc

No thats not true at all. The Avatar is an incredibly inspiring symbol to the Eldar, so it makes perfect sense that they are all fearless. And Vulkan is suppose to be a badass SM Commander, and well known for his badassness. So granting the said weapons a TL option isnt bad either.
Abusing a rule that allows (only because it was poorly written) something like Ghaz, that would never EVER get a chance to not only infiltrate, but use Snikrots ambush move, is a dick move. Yes its written that way, so you CAN do it, doesnt mean you SHOULD do it.

If you are joining a unit when being put in reserves, are you saying they are not part of the unit when rolled for?

The second part of the sentence above is not part of the rules for reserves, in fact it is overridden by the second bullet on page 48

"Alternatively an independent character may begin the game already with a unit, by being deployed in coherency with them"

When the unit moves on the IC is joined to them (as he was joining them as part of the reserves declaration)

Finally: your "method" would not allow any IC, ever, to join a unit that is outflanking within a vehicle - for example within a Valkyrie - as you claim they are not part of the unit until they arrive, meaning they cannot be carried in the Valkyrie as they are two units.

Madness.

Also ChrisCP, not that I like the rule (obviously Ive mentioned it many times) but according to how your looking at the rules there, you wouldnt be able to have a joined IC start in a battlewagon/trukk/vehicle for that matter on the same grounds that the vehicle is for UNIT A and since they have to be on the starting edge before said IC can join, youd have to start them out, 1 vehicle and one IC. THEN have the IC join and then embark.
Which is wrong. If they join in reserve, they are together, in reserve. Not separate, then join, then embark. So that logic goes with this whole thing

So by your own argument then yes, Ghazkull can be deployed with Sniktrot and for that matter with Zogwort or Maddok too - sorted.

ChrisCP wrote:
"if any of their independent characters left in reserve are joining a unit..."
So as I said earlier at no point is the IC joined to the unit...

And yes I can see some Smart-Alec saying ‘well I understand arriving together as being joined to the unit’ but again that is your take on the rule not what it actually says

The rule doesn't say, 'joining a unit for the purposes of entering, but they aren't actually joined ruleswise until they move into coherency on the board' it says 'joining a unit' followed by what that means for reserve rolls. If an IC is declared to be joining a unit in reserves, then he is joining that unit in reserves. That is what the rule says.

I know Gorka, I'd prefer the allowing of ICs to go with Snikt. That was the best most logical plainest argument I could come up with for not allowing it, and as people pointed out one can't RAW it's perfectly okay, and I can't really believe that it would be something looked-over or not fixed in the couple or GW errata’s that have been made for the orks codex. At the end of the day there are very few places where the RAW breaks down (eg. vehicles never suffering Vehicle - Destroyed! results) As everyone I play with argues RAW and usually demands RAW that's the best place to view any discussion I'm going to have. RAI is as people tell me a matter of opinion or 'house-ruling' and I've had it proven to me beyond reasonable argument that RAW this is more than allowable but how it's damn well meant to be played.


To clarify, I was trying my hardest to proove that it doesn't work because I'm on the other side of the argument. Being unable to do this 'we' can conclude that it does if one doesn't want to use this amazing ability *shrug* be "nice" or which ever justification one wants to not use it then.

KingCracker wrote:

kill dem stunties wrote:by that token you can call anyone following any rule as written a dick move, oh you took vulkan and all your melta is TL? wow what a dick move, omg avatar makes everything in 12" fearless? wow what a dick move etc etc

No thats not true at all. The Avatar is an incredibly inspiring symbol to the Eldar, so it makes perfect sense that they are all fearless. And Vulkan is suppose to be a badass SM Commander, and well known for his badassness. So granting the said weapons a TL option isnt bad either.
Abusing a rule that allows (only because it was poorly written) something like Ghaz, that would never EVER get a chance to not only infiltrate, but use Snikrots ambush move, is a dick move. Yes its written that way, so you CAN do it, doesnt mean you SHOULD do it.

are you kidding me? listing fluff reasons as why those rules arent dick moves?

"omg snikrots such a ninja, he makes everyone with him a total ninja, thats why it works" is slowed and it is exactly the rationale your using about the examples i gave .....

kill dem stunties wrote:

KingCracker wrote:

kill dem stunties wrote:by that token you can call anyone following any rule as written a dick move, oh you took vulkan and all your melta is TL? wow what a dick move, omg avatar makes everything in 12" fearless? wow what a dick move etc etc

No thats not true at all. The Avatar is an incredibly inspiring symbol to the Eldar, so it makes perfect sense that they are all fearless. And Vulkan is suppose to be a badass SM Commander, and well known for his badassness. So granting the said weapons a TL option isnt bad either.
Abusing a rule that allows (only because it was poorly written) something like Ghaz, that would never EVER get a chance to not only infiltrate, but use Snikrots ambush move, is a dick move. Yes its written that way, so you CAN do it, doesnt mean you SHOULD do it.

are you kidding me? listing fluff reasons as why those rules arent dick moves?

"omg snikrots such a ninja, he makes everyone with him a total ninja, thats why it works" is slowed and it is exactly the rationale your using about the examples i gave .....

I lol'd.

Yeah I agree, since snikrot is such a badass ninja known for his badassness he should totally be able to to sneak anyone anywhere.

Gorkamorka wrote:

Gold tooth Jerry wrote:
It says that infiltrate is not conferred to a unit that does not already have it, because the special ability does not say it is given to a IC. While right after it says that the special ability called stubborn is conferred because the rule states that it is conferred to the whole unit. This is the exact same wording that is used for ambush.

No, it isn't.
The stubborn example involves conferring the rule to the joined unit.
Infiltrate is stopped by a non-infiltrating IC because the IC is not conferred the infiltrate USR simply for joining a unit with it, and the rule says 'units with this rule'.

Ambush isn't conferring a rule to the IC or unit, and doesn't require that the whole unit have any special rule to use it.
It is an ability specific to Snikrot... I don't see any reason a joined IC cannot benefit from it. The rules surrounding ICs gaining special rules don't apply.

What you are missing is that the reason that the infiltrate rule is not conferred to the unit is because the wording in the special rule does not say it is conferred to the entire unit. Using the same wording, If the special rule stated that it was given to the entire unit then everyone in the unit and those who joined it would receive the special rule. This is not even a stretch. Is it really powerful? Yup. Do people say its not possible because it is too powerful? Yup.

What you have said is just opinion. Sure mine is also opinion. The truth of the matter is that there is reason to believe both ways and there is no official ruling on this. When I discuss this with people its about 50/50 that agree and disagree. Same thing with the deathrolla on vehicles thing. I have even talked to GW personnel and they agreed, however I am sure if someone else called with another point of view they would probably change. Update to FAQ is the only thing that would settle it, but I would bet a new codex before that happens

GTJ - the numb er that believes Deff rollas works on vehicles goes up significantly if you mention that, durnig 4th, Deff rollas worked on every vehicle from every army, with the twin exceptions of Land raiders and Monoliths. Suddenly you show it is not a "new" ability...

As for this one - "and his unit" is the EXACT same wording as FNP from Doks Tools, therefore if it works for one it must work for both, for the same reason.

The INAT FAQ, in this case, has ruled against Ambush plus IC because of the perceived power of it - no other reason. That is the only explanation for the inconsistency between FNP and Ambush present in the FAQ.

nosferatu1001 wrote:GTJ - the numb er that believes Deff rollas works on vehicles goes up significantly if you mention that, durnig 4th, Deff rollas worked on every vehicle from every army, with the twin exceptions of Land raiders and Monoliths.

The number drops back down again when you point out that we play in 5e, and the current ork codex was relased close enough to the BRB release that they would have been compared.

nosferatu1001 wrote:Suddenly you show it is not a "new" ability...

Like Ramming?

And ramming is a type of tank shock, and deff rollas work against ALL tank shocks.

And the circle is complete.

Ramming is not a new ability, it is a new name for "tank shocking a vehicle" - it extends the ability you had in 4th by allowing you to tank shock / ram any vehicle regardless of AV comparisons, and allowing every tank the chance to do damage.

It is still a type of tank shock, following the rules for tank shocks with the exceptions listed.

It is a type of tank shock move. Quote the whole line.

Or better yet. Drop it. Its been beaten more than the proverbial dead horse.

Wait, vehicles could be tank shocked in 4th edition? I thought they had to stop 1" away from other vehicles...

Oh and . . . Yaaaaay Nurglitch is posting again!