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.

visavismeyou wrote:So you disagree that when you build your army that the squad and IC are not joined?

Since there is no rule that says you can do this, I absolutely think that you can't consider the IC joined to the squad when you build your list.

How do IC's get into dedicated transports with a squad then?

If they transport is on the table, they do so by being deployed into the transport, as per the IC rules.
If the transport is in reserves, they do so by the player declaring that the IC is joining the unit in the transport, as per the Reserves rules.

I really think it is important to study this line:

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

"May begin the game" and "already" imply that a preexisting condition applies to the IC and the Squad, that is, being joined into a single unit before the game.

Deployment happens before the game begins. So yes, if you deploy an IC into the unit, he begins the game joined to the unit.

Nothing about that statement suggests that the IC can be joined prior to deployment.

How could an IC without infiltrate interfere with a unit of infiltrators? This quite clearly states that before the infiltrators are deployed via the infiltrate rule the IC without Infiltrate joins the unit with infiltrate and therefore they can deploy during the normal deployment but not during infiltrate deployment. If a squad and an IC were not joined as they were purchased together, then this special rules section would be worded differently.

All it's saying is that if you want an IC without the Infiltrate USR to join a unit of Infiltrators, they won't be able to infiltrate.

Thus, if I build an army list where Kor'Sarro Khan joins a Scout Squad then that squad cannot infiltrate; similarly, if I build a list where Shrike and a squad of terminators are in the same squad, then all 6 can infiltrate.

Except that there is no way provided by the rules to build such a list, because the rules for building an army list never mention being able to join IC's to units at that point.

The first point that the rules make mention of being allowed to join IC's to units is upon deployment or declaring Reserves.

insaniak wrote:

How could an IC without infiltrate interfere with a unit of infiltrators? This quite clearly states that before the infiltrators are deployed via the infiltrate rule the IC without Infiltrate joins the unit with infiltrate and therefore they can deploy during the normal deployment but not during infiltrate deployment. If a squad and an IC were not joined as they were purchased together, then this special rules section would be worded differently.

All it's saying is that if you want an IC without the Infiltrate USR to join a unit of Infiltrators, they won't be able to infiltrate.

Yes, it is saying that the IC and the Squad are joined prior to the deployment... Otherwise the infiltrators would still have the infiltrate USR during the regular deployment phase. This is the cornerstone of my argument and not my argument in extenso, please treat the argument as such.

If the rules state that an IC being joined to a unit removes the unit's ability to infiltrate, then the rules are stating that an IC joins a unit prior to the first stage of deployment, otherwise the rules would have to be worded differently to mean what they currently mean.

If the rules state that an IC being joined to a unit removes the unit's ability to infiltrate, then the rules are stating that an IC joins a unit prior to the first stage of deployment,

Nope. If the rules state that an IC who joins the unit removes the USR, all that says is that if an IC joins the unit, they lose the USR.

That doesn't give every IC in the game the ability to join a unit pre-deployment. It's simply an example of what happens if an IC does so.

In a similar vein, the rules state that if an IC has a retinue, he loses his IC status. That doesn't mean that every IC can have a retinue... for that to happen, the IC needs a rule that says that he can have a retinue.

Same thing here. If an IC joins a unit with the Infiltrate USR, it loses that USR. But for the IC to actually do that, he needs a rule that says that he can.

Shrike does have a rule stating that his unit gains the infiltrate USR.

How much clearer does it have to be.
How does an IC join a unit?
1-By moving within 2" of that unit, or
2-Alternatively at the beginning of the game by the simple mechanic of being deployed in coherency with the unit.
Nothing in the rules says that one or the other has to be deployed first, they are deployed together in coherency and are therefore joined. And since they are deployed together, if both have infiltrate, they can be deployed as infiltrators, but if they don't have the infiltrate USR, they are deployed normally or held in reserve. Like any other unit.

ncaa_40k wrote:Shrike does have a rule stating that his unit gains the infiltrate USR.

But he doesn't have a rule that would allow him to join a unit before deployment.

So the rule awarding his unit the USR does nothing.


Again, we know what it's supposed to do. At least one of the relevant rules (either the deployment rule for ICs, or Shrike's rule) is simply badly written. But as it stands, there is no way under the current rules for Shrike to ever grant a unit the ability to infiltrate. Outflank, yes. Infiltrate, no.

insaniak wrote:

ncaa_40k wrote:Shrike does have a rule stating that his unit gains the infiltrate USR.

But he doesn't have a rule that would allow him to join a unit before deployment.

So the rule awarding his unit the USR does nothing.


Again, we know what it's supposed to do. At least one of the relevant rules (either the deployment rule for ICs, or Shrike's rule) is simply badly written. But as it stands, there is no way under the current rules for Shrike to ever grant a unit the ability to infiltrate. Outflank, yes. Infiltrate, no.

I have one last question for you Insaniak, you've misrepresented and misunderstood several things in the rulebook to maintain that the rules are not written well, but I'm curious how you see this:

What happens first, Deployment? or the beginning of the game? As in, if X happens "At the beginning of the game" does it happen before or after "Z can happen as unit Y is deployed".

One last thing I'll note, if I have a unit of 5 Tactical Marines, how do I know that they are all in the same unit when I'm trying to deploy them? Why cant I just put them in 5 different places on the board? They arn't in the same unit until they are deployed right? They arn't in the same unit while they are in reserve or before deployment right?

I'm sorry Insaniak, your misrepresentation of the rules is the same as is required to deny that Space Marines can Combat Squad while deploying from reserves; 'deploy' is a verb, it is what happens when a unit is placed onto the table and is not some mystical enacting of powers.

visavismeyou wrote:What happens first, Deployment? or the beginning of the game? As in, if X happens "At the beginning of the game" does it happen before or after "Z can happen as unit Y is deployed".

As per the chart on page 86 of the rulebook, Deployment happens first. So something that happens at the start of the game happens after both sides have deployed their forces.

One last thing I'll note, if I have a unit of 5 Tactical Marines, how do I know that they are all in the same unit when I'm trying to deploy them? Why cant I just put them in 5 different places on the board? They arn't in the same unit until they are deployed right? They arn't in the same unit while they are in reserve or before deployment right?

When you deploy a unit of 5 tactical marines, you know they're all in the same unit because the unit you are deploying is a unit of 5 tactical marines...

Beyond that, I have no idea what you're getting at here.

I'm sorry Insaniak, your misrepresentation of the rules is the same as is required to deny that Space Marines can Combat Squad while deploying from reserves; 'deploy' is a verb, it is what happens when a unit is placed onto the table and is not some mystical enacting of powers.

What exactly have I misrepresented? All I have done is pointed out that there is no rule allowing you to do what you are trying to do.

That's not some strange creation of my own... it's a fairly widely accepted fact. As is the fact that Shrike is clearly supposed to be able to infiltrate with a unit, which is why everybody plays it that way.

Frankly, I'm a little puzzled as to why it's such a big issue. In this particular case, the rules are badly written, but everyone understands what they meant and plays it that way anyway. That's really all there is to it.

insaniak wrote:

One last thing I'll note, if I have a unit of 5 Tactical Marines, how do I know that they are all in the same unit when I'm trying to deploy them? Why cant I just put them in 5 different places on the board? They arn't in the same unit until they are deployed right? They arn't in the same unit while they are in reserve or before deployment right?

When you deploy a unit of 5 tactical marines, you know they're all in the same unit because the unit you are deploying is a unit of 5 tactical marines...

Beyond that, I have no idea what you're getting at here.

I'm just trying to make the point that a unit is defined before the game starts (before deployment, before you start putting terrain on the table...), either a unit of 5 tactical marines, or a unit of 5 tactical marines with an IC...

visavismeyou wrote:I'm just trying to make the point that a unit is defined before the game starts (before deployment, before you start putting terrain on the table...), either a unit of 5 tactical marines, or a unit of 5 tactical marines with an IC...

The unit is defined by your army list. Before the game starts, the only combinations that you can legally put together are those that are specifically laid out in the codex.

So you can only put an IC with a unit at that point if the codex specifically says you can. Otherwise, you're stuck with him being separate until the game rules say that he can join a unit.

But the rules as written in the rulebook are the rules. That's what a rulebook does.

It does not it is simply a set of symbols that communicate the rules to use. Our understanding of that communication is how we interpret the rules. Our interpretation does not define the rules. Using literalism is not the only way to interpret written text and it is certainly not the way the rulebook was written to be interpreted I'm not sure why you are so set on this idea?

You consistently claim RaW= The Rules but by RaW; RaW=/= The Rules so you're being hypocritical by claiming that. You're saying you have to literally translate every word except the few that you degree unimportant (i.e. where it says Clarification in an FAQ that changes RaW).

I'm just trying to make the point that a unit is defined before the game starts (before deployment, before you start putting terrain on the table...), either a unit of 5 tactical marines, or a unit of 5 tactical marines with an IC...

It is because the unit of 5 tactical marines is defined as a single unit in the army list when you pick the list. An IC is not defined as part of any unit when you pick a list except if he has a retinue. Say for instance I have Shrike with a unit of assault marines in my army, but I also take a unit of Hammernators. I'm up against 'Nidzilla and decide the assault marines aren't a good place to put Shrike so I stick him with the Hammernators, I'm allowed to do this because he doesn't (and can't) join the unit until deployment. I couldn't however decide that the Assault squad Sergeant would also run with the terminators now as he has to stay with his unit.

FlingitNow wrote:

But the rules as written in the rulebook are the rules. That's what a rulebook does.

It does not it is simply a set of symbols that communicate the rules to use. Our understanding of that communication is how we interpret the rules. Our interpretation does not define the rules. Using literalism is not the only way to interpret written text and it is certainly not the way the rulebook was written to be interpreted I'm not sure why you are so set on this idea?

You consistently claim RaW= The Rules but by RaW; RaW=/= The Rules so you're being hypocritical by claiming that. You're saying you have to literally translate every word except the few that you degree unimportant (i.e. where it says Clarification in an FAQ that changes RaW).

You appear to be implying that there is some other source of the rules other than the rulebook and the various FAQ's. If you are using transcendental meditation or some other mechanisms to receive additional rules, it would be helpful to explain what mechanisms you are using. If nothing else, it would explain why it is no one agrees with your conclusions.

FlingitNow wrote:

I'm just trying to make the point that a unit is defined before the game starts (before deployment, before you start putting terrain on the table...), either a unit of 5 tactical marines, or a unit of 5 tactical marines with an IC...

It is because the unit of 5 tactical marines is defined as a single unit in the army list when you pick the list. An IC is not defined as part of any unit when you pick a list except if he has a retinue. Say for instance I have Shrike with a unit of assault marines in my army, but I also take a unit of Hammernators. I'm up against 'Nidzilla and decide the assault marines aren't a good place to put Shrike so I stick him with the Hammernators, I'm allowed to do this because he doesn't (and can't) join the unit until deployment. I couldn't however decide that the Assault squad Sergeant would also run with the terminators now as he has to stay with his unit.

And this is allowed because there are rules written in the rulebook and in the various codices and rulebooks which allow this. According to how those rules have been written, the only way for a unit which Shrike has joined to benefit from the granted Infiltrate ability is to outflank. Note there have been previous instances of units granted special rules while only being able to gain partial benefit of those rules (relentless units without heavy weapons; units which gain Scouts after being deployed; etc.) And more importantly, the special rules and abilities of units have changed radically between editions in the past. This leads to the conclusion that the codex authors are competent and intended that Shrike operate in the method the rules currently allow.

You appear to be implying that there is some other source of the rules other than the rulebook and the various FAQ's. If you are using transcendental meditation or some other mechanisms to receive additional rules, it would be helpful to explain what mechanisms you are using. If nothing else, it would explain why it is no one agrees with your conclusions.

Where do I claim to be using a source other than the written texts? Why is literalism the only way you can understand written text? Why no one agrees with me? Well they do plenty of people on this forum agree with me and in fact loads of threads boil down to RaW vs RaI on this forum.

Also you haven't countered the point that if RaW = The Rules then by RaW; RaW =/= The Rules, hence the premise that RaW = The Rules can not possibly be true.

This leads to the conclusion that the codex authors are competent and intended that Shrike operate in the method the rules currently allow.

If they were competant why would they not just write that shrikle gives his unit outflank since that is the only effect he is having on them by your interpretation? The examples you listed were not comparable at all. Having the scout rule is useful after deployment as you can still then scout, having relentless without heavy weapons is also still useful as you can fire rapidfire weapons to full range whilst moving and assault after firing rapidfire weapons. So in both instances you are actually utilising the special rule you have been given in this case you are not utilising the special rule you have been given instead you are utilising a different special rule that also comes with the special rule you have but not the acual rule that you have.

An IC can mess up a unit's ability to Infiltrate by being held in reserves with that unit. If the unit has Infiltrate, it could normally Outflank. If joined by an IC without Infiltrate, then the unit could no longer Outflank. That is why the rule is written as such, so this portion of your argument doesn't address the point.

I think what Insaniak is trying to say is that there are multiple stages of the rules process:
Developers think of a RULE (Rules as Intended).
Developers must attempt to commit that idea to paper (Rules as Written)
Gamers must attempt to understand those written words (Rules as Interpreted)

Because the developers seem to lack a grasp of how to write a real manual in any kind of scientific language, the only consistent way to Interpret the rules is As Written, which often and obviously deviates from what was Intended (see fun list of raw fun thread)


In this case I personally think there is sufficient implication in multiple places in both the codex and BGB to indicate that the conservative literal reading of the RAW is incorrect, and the intention is that Shrike (and other characters) can in fact be joined to a unit before deployment.

I know it's been brought up, but I haven't really seen it sufficiently addressed:

How can you put an IC in a vehicle with another unit if you aren't allowed to join them before deployment?

Monster Rain wrote:I know it's been brought up, but I haven't really seen it sufficiently addressed:

How can you put an IC in a vehicle with another unit if you aren't allowed to join them before deployment?

You Join them AT Deployment, not BEFORE deployment.

"Alternatively an independent Character may begin the game already with a unit, by being deployed in coherency with them." BRB, P48

So they can be deployed at the same time, and at the time of being deployed with Shrike they will have the Infiltrate USR which would mean that they may infiltrate.

What am I missing?

Monster Rain wrote:"Alternatively an independent Character may begin the game already with a unit, by being deployed in coherency with them." BRB, P48

So they can be deployed at the same time, and at the time of being deployed with Shrike they will have the Infiltrate USR which would mean that they may infiltrate.

What am I missing?

You are missing the fact that Infiltrators deploy AFTER the other models.

Lets take SHrike and Terminators, Shirke wants to Infiltrate.

The Terminators MUST either be deployed OR In Reserve BEFORE Shirke Deploys, as it does not have the Infiltrate USR.
Then Shrike Deploys. The Termies are already deployed so they now cannot infiltrate.

But if they're deploying with Shrike they have the USR, so they Infiltrate.

Monster Rain wrote:But if they're deploying with Shrike they have the USR, so they Infiltrate.

They cannot, because they do not have the USR at the time they deploy because SHrike is not attached to them.

So then why does the Codex say Infiltrate instead of "The ability to Outflank"? There's obviously a difference between the two to the rules writers, since Khan's Codex entry makes the distinction.

Monster Rain wrote:So then why does the Codex say Infiltrate instead of "The ability to Outflank"? There's obviously a difference between the two to the rules writers, since Khan's Codex entry makes the distinction.

Because The Author was feeling a bit Metaphysical?

WHo knows what they were thinking. There was no Errata, so we have to assume it is what they intended, and the RaW is crystal Clear.

Because RAI and RAW sometimes don't mix...and they haven't had the balls to admit they screwed up and won't introduce an updated FAQ?

The whole issue is a timing issue of when Shrike Joins a squad that does not have infiltrate already.

As for Khan, they make it a point for him to outflank his dudes because that's what he does, he does not infiltrate and hence does not give that to squads...

So why bother having the rule in the first place if not to allow a unit to Infiltrate that wouldn't ordinarily?

Sanctjud, the Khan example had nothing to do with fluff or anything other than the fact that the rules writers see a difference between Infiltrate and "the ability to outflank."

Gwar! wrote:

Monster Rain wrote:So then why does the Codex say Infiltrate instead of "The ability to Outflank"? There's obviously a difference between the two to the rules writers, since Khan's Codex entry makes the distinction.

Because The Author was feeling a bit Metaphysical?

WHo knows what they were thinking. There was no Errata, so we have to assume it is what they intended, and the RaW is crystal Clear.

Almost everyone except Gwar and Nosferatu001 seem to know what they had thougth of.

The clear Part of the rule is in Codex SM.

Monster Rain wrote:So why bother having the rule in the first place if not to allow a unit to Infiltrate that wouldn't ordinarily?

To allow Shrike to Infiltrate with a unit of scouts? To allow him to infiltrate on his own? To allow him to outflank with a unit of dudes?

Scouts already have infiltrate, and so instead of SBDBS they could have just given Shrike himself the Infiltrate USR.

I agree with you on the outflank bit, Gwar.

Monster Rain wrote:Scouts already have infiltrate, and so instead of SBDBS they could have just given Shrike himself the Infiltrate USR.

I agree with you on the outflank bit, Gwar.

True, they COULD have, but they didn't. This doesn't change what the RaW says, and it's clear as day what it does.

1hadhq wrote:

Gwar! wrote:

Monster Rain wrote:So then why does the Codex say Infiltrate instead of "The ability to Outflank"? There's obviously a difference between the two to the rules writers, since Khan's Codex entry makes the distinction.

Because The Author was feeling a bit Metaphysical?

WHo knows what they were thinking. There was no Errata, so we have to assume it is what they intended, and the RaW is crystal Clear.

Almost everyone except Gwar and Nosferatu001 seem to know what they had thougth of.

The clear Part of the rule is in Codex SM.

You seem to confuse a discussion on rules with how I would play this in real life.

You keep doing that.