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 logic has an inherent fallacy in it. If they unit is not present in the field of battle, how is it able to fire out of a fire point on the vehicle for example?

Also, the BRB continuously makes mention of a transport 'carrying' units.

Lastly, the bit of the sentence you conveniently left out in your argument "placed aside, making a note or otherwise marking that the unit is being transported." Again, this implies that the unit is effectively inside the transport, and is only not physically placed as such due to modeling issues.

It goes on to say that "If the players need to measure a range involving the embarked unit (except for its shooting), this range is measured to or from the vehicle's hull." This also implies that the unit is inside the vehicle for any effect that involves the unit.

As a simple thought experiment, if I have a ball on the floor is it still on the floor if i put a glass over it? My thinking says yes.

Of course, RAW does cause a bit of a problem with that logic, but it also causes issues like the one Green is the Best! mentioned.

My guess is that RAI is that the unit is 'inside' the vehicle for all intents and purposes, and thus still in play. This also brings up the interesting fact that if they were removed from the table, and you can only ever target things on the table, why does a FAQ entry explicitly state that a psycher can target his own unit if both he and the unit are in a transport?

WanderingFox wrote:That logic has an inherent fallacy in it. If they unit is not present in the field of battle, how is it able to fire out of a fire point on the vehicle for example?

Oh, I agree it's kinda stupid. Nonetheless many GW FAQs have really set the precedent that a unit in a vehicle is not "there" in many ways. They are in others. And it's not like GW is smart, or in any way logical about this kinda of stuff. There was some old Daemonhunter power, or something like that, that required the caster be "on the table", and it was ruled that if the user was in a vehicle, he did not count as "on the table".

Another case in point: The Tyranid FAQ specifically states that Shadows of the Warp does not affect a psyker inside a vehicle. Of course, by the exact same logic, the same thing would apply to psychic hoods. Now, people get real quiet about that, because everyone thought the tyranid ruling was crazy-pants, and SM are different, cuz they're popular. But still, if you wanted to argue that your opponents psychic hood doesn't affect you inside a vehicle, you'd have legitimate footing.

That's a wandering point. But anyway, there is precedent to say units in a vehicle aren't on the table, and no, they haven't been consistent about it. But that makes all the rest of what you said piss in the wind.

True enough. Wee yet another completely gray area. Guess this falls into a roll-of at the start of the game then

GW are just pisserd of with the fact that the Ultramarines could necver win the Battle for Maccragge box game,and came up with Black Reach so that the marines would always win.Just look at the points difference,the abilty of 4 ork modasl being actaually able to harm the Draednought.

Green is Best! wrote:

DevianID wrote:Gate requires you to remove the models from the table. This is not qualified with "if they are on the table," this is a required step in the power.

If you read your embark section, you will find that embarking ALSO removes your models from the table.

You can not remove models from the table that another special rule already required you to remove from the table.

You may absolutely not use GoI on an embarked unit. You must be on the table. Embarking EXPLICITLY removes the models from the table, exactly the same that GOI requires you to do. You must disembark to use GoI.

So, by this logic, if a Shokk Attack Gun removed the vehicle from play (double 6's), it would not affect the people inside?

RAW, it doesn't. First it penetrates the vehicle, giving the passengers a chance to get out if the vehicle is destroyed. Then it's removed from play.

DevianID wrote:Gate requires you to remove the models from the table. This is not qualified with "if they are on the table," this is a required step in the power.

If you read your embark section, you will find that embarking ALSO removes your models from the table.

You can not remove models from the table that another special rule already required you to remove from the table.

You may absolutely not use GoI on an embarked unit. You must be on the table. Embarking EXPLICITLY removes the models from the table, exactly the same that GOI requires you to do. You must disembark to use GoI.

So how does this affect units 'shooting' from a fire point on a transport?

The models are not physically on the table, but they are embarked on a transport. They are on the table since they are allowed to shoot out of fire points.

GoI may be used while embarked.

Units shooting from a transport have special rules for shooting while embarked (and off the table)

Deathreaper, I implore you to read the embark section. The models are removed from the table.

Just because they can shoot, does not make it"on the table" but instead "in play"

DevianID wrote:Units shooting from a transport have special rules for shooting while embarked (and off the table)

Deathreaper, I implore you to read the embark section. The models are removed from the table.

Just because they can shoot, does not make it"on the table" but instead "in play"

Trying to apply magic rules mechanics to 40k will result in the creation of a singularity.

That's just bad rules. I don't believe there is an 'in play' definition or 'state'.

The language "The Librarian, and any unit he is with, are removed from the tabletop and immediately placed back together anywhere within 24" using the deep strike rules" (Codex: Space Marines p. 57) sounds more like a consequence of using the power rather than a condition required to use the power. Accordingly I would not interpret the GoI rule as requiring the unit to be on the tabletop to work.

Hope this helps!
-GiantKiller

It does say "removed" and then "placed back". Because it's all one entry choosing not to follow the first part seems suspect, as there is no conflict here. You can still use the power, you just need to be on the board first.

I'd hazard a guess that it's phrased as such due to deep strike rules functioning from reserve (veil of darkness is phrased exactly the same way).

DevianID wrote:It does say "removed" and then "placed back". Because it's all one entry choosing not to follow the first part seems suspect, as there is no conflict here. You can still use the power, you just need to be on the board first.

But you are considered 'on the board'. Removing the models from the table for embarked units almost seems to be like a 'book keeping' issue and not a 'game state'.