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.

That makes no sense at all. The language giving you option to take a Spod is under the host units entry, "This brood may take a Spod (see points cost below)".

The 'can' doesn't relate to which units are able to use the Spod but it does relate to how many models can fit.

Slackermagee wrote:That makes no sense at all.

Nor does pivoting reducing move, but I digress.

I think the RaW is one way, you think it's the other way, it needs an Errata so until GW get off their arses and nick my Nid FAQ, we won't know for sure.

Agreed?

Gwar! wrote:I disagree. I feel that the Can is there because the spod is not mandatory.

So you said. But why?

They could have said that the pod must transport 20 models, and it still wouldn't have been mandatory to take one... because the line in question is nothing whatsoever to do with the unit's ability or requirement to take a pod. It is simply a statement of the pod's transport capability.


Saying the pod can transport 20 models means the pod has the ability to transport 20 models. It does not require a unit to take one, just means that so long as they are fewer than 21 in number, they can ride in it if they do.

Saying the pod must transport 20 models means that a pod must transport 20 models. It still does not require the unit to take one, just means that if they do, they have to ride in it... assuming there are 20 of them.

Simply put, the requirement you are trying to insert in there is just not at all related to the actual rule in question.

I am saying that the use of the language "can" is for a number of reasons.

One: The pod is not mandatory, so they cannot use the word Must. They use the word can instead. Must can imply you have to buy a spod, which is not the case.
Two: Can is not the same as may.
Three: It also uses can instead of must because less than 20 models can "ride" in it.

Gwar! wrote:One: The pod is not mandatory, so they cannot use the word Must. They use the word can instead. Must can imply you have to buy a spod, which is not the case.

Sorry, Gwar, but that doesn't make any sense.

Again, the rule being questioned is not the rule granting the unit permission to take the pod. It's the rule granting the pod the ability to transport models. That rule simply says that the pod can carry 20 models. It has nothing whatsoever to do with whether or not the unit must take the pod in the first place, any more than a rule saying that a bolter can fire two shots means that any given model must take one.


You have confused two completely separate issues.


If the rule in question said 'must' that likewise would not require you to take one, any more than an Ork player would have to take Grotsnik in his army because he has a rule that says he must move towards the enemy... The only way you get a requirement to take a unit is if the rules specifically say you have to take it. Otherwise, a given unit's rules only apply if you actually take that unit. So a rule saying that a pod must transport 20 models (if such a rule existed) would not require you to take the pod... it would simply require the pod to transport 20 models if you took one.

Like I said, I'll drop it. I think it's one way, you think it's the other. Until GW errata it, we won't know for sure.

I can see where your argument is coming from, and I think it can be as valid as mine.

But as I have been quoted in someones sig, I really stopped actually caring all too long ago.

Gwar! wrote:

Slackermagee wrote:That makes no sense at all.

Nor does pivoting reducing move, but I digress.

I think the RaW is one way, you think it's the other way, it needs an Errata so until GW get off their arses and nick my Nid FAQ, we won't know for sure.

Agreed?

Don't make me come back in there, young man!

Anyways, the Space Marine drop pod rules state that "The drop pod has a capacity of 12 models. It can transport a single Dreadnought or Thunderfire cannon." So in this case, going with the general trend of Codex trumping BRB RAW, infantry can deploy without their drop pods but dreadnoughts and Thunderfire cannons must? Your argument just doesn't work here.

It does, because a Drop Pod is a Dedicated Transport vehicle, so follows the rules in the BRB for DTVs.

Codex does not Trump Rulebook.
Specific Trumps General.

Gwar! wrote:It does, because a Drop Pod is a Dedicated Transport vehicle, so follows the rules in the BRB for DTVs.

And in this particular case, that makes a difference... how?

What are you basing the argument on that a statement that a transport vehicle can transport models means it doesn't have to, while a statement that the pod can transport models means that it must do so...?

My argument is that because it is not a Vehicle and doesn't "transport" anything. That is why it is not optional.

If you buy a Pod, you must use it, because the rules do not give you permission to not use it. They give you permission to use it, but not permission to not use it once bought.

The drop pod rules don't give you permission to not use them in the case of dreadnoughts and TFCs though. Its a specific line that, in your line of reasoning with the Spod, contradicts the BRB.