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.

Unit type - Bike (which taking a warbike changes you to) grants:

Armoured steed - T +1, cannot go to ground, cannot be pinned

(and that's all that special sub-rule does)

Bikes can move 12'', are not slowed by difficult terrain even when charging but treat it as dangerous.

Bikes move 3d6 '' when falling back rather than 2d6

Each bike can fire one weapon per rider on the bike

Bikes (the unit type the big mek was changed to) have the Hammer of wrath, jink, relentless and Very Bulky special rules.

A relentless SAG toting Biker is possible, no matter how you dislike the concept. If you don't like the image of him packing it on a shoulder, visualise it as a sidecar

 Ond Angel wrote:
If you want to follow what is written so strictly and word for word, you'll see that a bike has no BS, WS, I, A, etc. so it may not even shoot..

You can see even in the quote in red above that I am saying literally the same stuff as you...

You fail to realize you're arguing with someone you agree with...

EDIT**

Save for one thing...

That the gun is taken as seperate wargear by the mek, not the bike.

That is how it is WRITTEN.

Whereas you'll see Warboss Gazbag's Blitzbike is what " is equipped with twil-linked kustom dakkablastas with the following profile:" not the Big Mek...

The entire arguement that ensued was simplified by one person, which I pointed out already, who claims the rule for relentless is conferred in the same manner as it is for terminator armor...

 Awfeel wrote:

 Ond Angel wrote:
If you want to follow what is written so strictly and word for word, you'll see that a bike has no BS, WS, I, A, etc. so it may not even shoot..

You can see even in the quote in red above that I am saying literally the same stuff as you...

So you've moved on from your first post in this thread, where you were saying it wasn't possible as written?
Because I've demonstrated that it is.

=

rigeld2 wrote:

 Awfeel wrote:

 Ond Angel wrote:
If you want to follow what is written so strictly and word for word, you'll see that a bike has no BS, WS, I, A, etc. so it may not even shoot..

You can see even in the quote in red above that I am saying literally the same stuff as you...

So you've moved on from your first post in this thread, where you were saying it wasn't possible as written?
Because I've demonstrated that it is.

Pretty sure I asked if I missed something in my first post.

You may want to view the thread chronologically from my PoV specifically.

I said it was possible and said that I agreed that it was possible some 3-5 times, yet you all are arguing that the text is not WRITTEN otherwise, which it clearly is, as per the examples I have given.

 Awfeel wrote:
I said it was possible and said that I agreed that it was possible some 3-5 times, yet you all are arguing that the text is not WRITTEN otherwise, which it clearly is, as per the examples I have given.

It's not written otherwise. It's explicitly allowed as I've quoted. Do you agree that I've quoted the rules involved correctly?
Do you agree that Bikes have Relentless?
Do you agree that Bikes fire weapons?
Do you agree that Relentless models can move and fire Heavy weapons?

As for chronology,
http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/605106.page#7021553
Stated it wasn't possible.
http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/605106.page#7021754
Continued with that assertion.
http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/605106.page#7021765
More arguing that it isn't possible.
http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/605106.page#7021875
And more.
http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/605106.page#7021926
Goalposts shifted to who actually has Relentless?
http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/605106.page#7022085
Idon'teven...
http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/605106.page#7022099
It's not conferred.
http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/605106.page#7022124
You ignoring me.

rigeld2 wrote:

 Awfeel wrote:
I said it was possible and said that I agreed that it was possible some 3-5 times, yet you all are arguing that the text is not WRITTEN otherwise, which it clearly is, as per the examples I have given.

It's not written otherwise. It's explicitly allowed as I've quoted. Do you agree that I've quoted the rules involved correctly?
Do you agree that Bikes have Relentless?
Do you agree that Bikes fire weapons?
Do you agree that Relentless models can move and fire Heavy weapons?
Do you agree that the Bike is not equipped with a Shokk Attack Gun as per written rules?

As for chronology,
http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/605106.page#7021553
Stated it wasn't possible.
http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/605106.page#7021754
Continued with that assertion.
http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/605106.page#7021765
More arguing that it isn't possible.
http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/605106.page#7021875
And more.
http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/605106.page#7021926
Goalposts shifted to who actually has Relentless?
http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/605106.page#7022085
Idon'teven...
http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/605106.page#7022099
It's not conferred.
http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/605106.page#7022124
You ignoring me.

Missed something.

The distinction between rider and bike is not equal to a distinction between the model pre-bike purchase and the bike wargear. There's no such distinction - once the model purchases the bike wargear, that model becomes a Bike. The distinction between bike and rider is now only one of the model's appearance - the number of riders modelled on the figure determines how many times the bike can shoot. Inferring that the character and the model's rider are one and the same is a mistake, in terms of RAW.

 Awfeel wrote:
Do you agree that the Bike is not equipped with a Shokk Attack Gun as per written rules?
Missed something.

Model is the Bike. Correct?
The model purchases upgrades. Correct?
So where is your assertion coming from? Please elaborate because you're not making any sense at this point.

I don't see anything in the rules to back up what awfeel keeps asserting.

The bike and the rider are a single model.
The model has the bike unit type.
The model is therefore relentless.
How is that difficult to understand?

The bike is nothing more than wargear. By awfeels logic a demon prince with wings can't swoop because its the wings that are a flying monstrous creature and not the demon prince...

in past editions there was a difference between firing bike mounted weapons and the rider firing weapons.

now the model is just type bike and has relentless so yes it can fire a SAG.

keep in mind mega armor can't get a SAG, so chances are the FAQ will prevent a big mek on bike from getting a SAG as they don't want you to get relentless on a SAG it seems. So model one of these at your own peril at the moment.

Aw feel - the model has relentless, agreed? Now, can you please look up what relentless does, and retract your assertions?

If bikes dident grant relentless, there would be a lot of angry space marine players with grav gun bikers.

I don't have the space marines dex with me, but aren't the grav guns an upgrade to the bikes bolters or are they an upgrade to the bikers bolters?

not that it matters in 7th lol.

I look forward to treating all wargear as completely independent from every other piece of wargear and the model carrying it. Uh oh, I can't take a save granted by a piece of wargear, because he's firing at the model carrying it! Whoops, looks like my gun doesn't have its own BS specified so I can't fire it!

Each bike can fire one weapon per rider on the bike

All you end up with is a model with 2 guns (the SAG and the TL Dakkagun), but only one rider. So each turn you have to decide which gun you want to fire, but otherwise I don't see how that wouldn't work. That's kind of amazing actually. Just last night I used a BikeMek with a KFF to keep up with a pair of BWs and spread his save over both. Now I can't wait to run him next to a SAGMek on a bike!

There is nothing I see prohibiting a Big Mek from taking a Shokk Attack Gun on a Bike at all. They would have to issue an errata to specifically prohibit it.

In fact, I just found something better. Go in option order on the Big Mek's page. Go to the first set of list options. Take a Warbike. Then move down to the next option and change your choppa/slugga for Mega Armour. How did that happen?

Note how it says under Warbike that it cannot be taken if you have Mega Armour. Now note how there is no such restriction under Mega Armour. It does not say you may not take Mega Armour if you have taken a Warbike. By order of purchasing upgrades, you are not breaking rules. You do not have Mega Armour when you take your Warbike, so this is legal. Then it allows you, AFTER the option to take the warbike, to take Mega Armour, And nothing under Mega Armour says you cannot take it if you have a Warbike. And you don't suddenly lose your warbike - when you took it, you did not have Mega Armour.

That right there is more likely to be FAQ'd than a SAG on a Bike.

 Dilt wrote:
There is nothing I see prohibiting a Big Mek from taking a Shokk Attack Gun on a Bike at all. They would have to issue an errata to specifically prohibit it.

In fact, I just found something better. Go in option order on the Big Mek's page. Go to the first set of list options. Take a Warbike. Then move down to the next option and change your choppa/slugga for Mega Armour. How did that happen?

Note how it says under Warbike that it cannot be taken if you have Mega Armour. Now note how there is no such restriction under Mega Armour. It does not say you may not take Mega Armour if you have taken a Warbike. By order of purchasing upgrades, you are not breaking rules. You do not have Mega Armour when you take your Warbike, so this is legal. Then it allows you, AFTER the option to take the warbike, to take Mega Armour, And nothing under Mega Armour says you cannot take it if you have a Warbike. And you don't suddenly lose your warbike - when you took it, you did not have Mega Armour.

That right there is more likely to be FAQ'd than a SAG on a Bike.

You purchased a bike
You purchased Mega Armour.
You're correct that you don't have the Mega Armour when you're choosing the bike, however, from what you've said

Note how it says under Warbike that it cannot be taken if you have Mega Armour.

Do you have Mega Armour and a Warbike? Yes.
You have, at this point, taken a Warbike and Mega Armour. You can't have a Warbike if you have Mega Armour.

There are some things that order of operations can enable (for instance, replacing the Nob's slugga before upgrading the unit with shootas, so you (maybe, this isn't settled yet AFAIK) don't have to pay a point for a weapon he won't use), but trying to use it to rationalize an explicitly prohibited combo is not going to get you many friends, or many games.

He would probably fall off of his bike a lot!

 BarBoBot wrote:
I don't see anything in the rules to back up what awfeel keeps asserting.

The bike and the rider are a single model.
The model has the bike unit type.
The model is therefore relentless.
How is that difficult to understand?

The bike is nothing more than wargear. By awfeels logic a demon prince with wings can't swoop because its the wings that are a flying monstrous creature and not the demon prince...

How do you not see something I pointed directly to in the text ?

The bike logic this..

There was a discernment in the text, as written, between rider and bike on page 63.

Prove that there is not.

However, I have not disagreed with the model being relentless since someone pointed out the relationship between bike and terminator armour.

This has been said some four times now, yet no one seems to grasp the concept.

Sidebarring, does this mean that you could take a grot oiler to ride shotgun and the model be able to shoot two weapons? No. But it sure as hell is written that way.

The text is not specific in some aspects and overly specific in others.

 Awfeel wrote:

 BarBoBot wrote:
I don't see anything in the rules to back up what awfeel keeps asserting.

The bike and the rider are a single model.
The model has the bike unit type.
The model is therefore relentless.
How is that difficult to understand?

The bike is nothing more than wargear. By awfeels logic a demon prince with wings can't swoop because its the wings that are a flying monstrous creature and not the demon prince...

How do you not see something I pointed directly to in the text ?

The bike logic this..

There was a discernment in the text, as written, between rider and bike on page 63.

Prove that there is not.

However, I have not disagreed with the model being relentless since someone pointed out the relationship between bike and terminator armour.

This has been said some four times now, yet no one seems to grasp the concept.

Sidebarring, does this mean that you could take a grot oiler to ride shotgun and the model be able to shoot two weapons? No. But it sure as hell is written that way.

The text is not specific in some aspects and overly specific in others.

Just drop it. The problem has been solved

 Dilt wrote:
There is nothing I see prohibiting a Big Mek from taking a Shokk Attack Gun on a Bike at all. They would have to issue an errata to specifically prohibit it.

In fact, I just found something better. Go in option order on the Big Mek's page. Go to the first set of list options. Take a Warbike. Then move down to the next option and change your choppa/slugga for Mega Armour. How did that happen?

Note how it says under Warbike that it cannot be taken if you have Mega Armour. Now note how there is no such restriction under Mega Armour. It does not say you may not take Mega Armour if you have taken a Warbike. By order of purchasing upgrades, you are not breaking rules. You do not have Mega Armour when you take your Warbike, so this is legal. Then it allows you, AFTER the option to take the warbike, to take Mega Armour, And nothing under Mega Armour says you cannot take it if you have a Warbike. And you don't suddenly lose your warbike - when you took it, you did not have Mega Armour.

That right there is more likely to be FAQ'd than a SAG on a Bike.

That seems like cheating and no one who actually knows the rules will play against it. Who cares what order you purchase them in? If you have both in the end it's not allowed.

So I've been cheating by loading my command squad with Grav guns and firing full salvo's?

Lol.

Y'all should stop the argument with this guy. I think it's more confusing to the OP.

OP: yes, you can have a SAG on a bike. In fact let me see if you convert one. I'm thinking of doing the same thing.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Waaagh 18 wrote:

 Dilt wrote:
There is nothing I see prohibiting a Big Mek from taking a Shokk Attack Gun on a Bike at all. They would have to issue an errata to specifically prohibit it.

In fact, I just found something better. Go in option order on the Big Mek's page. Go to the first set of list options. Take a Warbike. Then move down to the next option and change your choppa/slugga for Mega Armour. How did that happen?

Note how it says under Warbike that it cannot be taken if you have Mega Armour. Now note how there is no such restriction under Mega Armour. It does not say you may not take Mega Armour if you have taken a Warbike. By order of purchasing upgrades, you are not breaking rules. You do not have Mega Armour when you take your Warbike, so this is legal. Then it allows you, AFTER the option to take the warbike, to take Mega Armour, And nothing under Mega Armour says you cannot take it if you have a Warbike. And you don't suddenly lose your warbike - when you took it, you did not have Mega Armour.

That right there is more likely to be FAQ'd than a SAG on a Bike.

That seems like cheating and no one who actually knows the rules will play against it. Who cares what order you purchase them in? If you have both in the end it's not allowed.

Why is it cheating? What's the difference between a SAG on a bike and a Master of the forge on a bike with a conversion Beamer?

The rules state that a big Mek can have either a KFF or a SAG.
It also says they can get orky know wots and one of the pieces of gear is a warbike.

Does not say you can't have both and the war gears list has a bunch of * all over the place, giving exception to rules but no where does it say it's illegal to have a warbike and a SAG

Johnnytorrance,
Waagh 18 was directly responding to someone stating there is a loophole allowing Mega Armour and a Bike on one model, and not the Opening Posters mention of a Shock Attack Gun. Needless to state, taking a Mega Armour and Bike together is clearly 'that ******* guy' if someone seriously tried to argue the order of purchase allows us to get around a very obvious Restriction. This is based on the order which things are purchased, that it states the Model can not take instead of stating it can never be combined, and the fact the restriction is only found on one piece of Wargear and not the other.

Seeing as you mentioned being a Space Marine player, it would be the same as having a Terminator Armour clad Model on a Bike by claiming that the Bike was purchased first so it is all legal.

K, so did I miss it, or has anyone posted the Warbike rule?

(Codex: Orks p.98)

'A model equipped with a warbike changes their unit type to Bike, as described in Warhammer 40,000: The Rules.'

Seems to me like that settles it. A Big Mek on a Warbike is a Bike. As a bike he has HoW,Jink, Relentless, and Very Bulky.

 Awfeel wrote:

How do you not see something I pointed directly to in the text ?

The bike logic this..

There was a discernment in the text, as written, between rider and bike on page 63.

Prove that there is not.

However, I have not disagreed with the model being relentless since someone pointed out the relationship between bike and terminator armour.

This has been said some four times now, yet no one seems to grasp the concept.

Sidebarring, does this mean that you could take a grot oiler to ride shotgun and the model be able to shoot two weapons? No. But it sure as hell is written that way.

The text is not specific in some aspects and overly specific in others.

I believe that I adressed this further up: http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/30/605106.page#7022273

In essence, a "rider" in terms of the rules has no bearing on the game except in terms of how many times the model may shoot. Other than that the rider is not in any way distinct from the bike and is not in any way identical to the character that purchased the bike upgrade. It is merely a matter of modelling (which brings us into modelling for advantage, I suppose).
And yes, I agree that this raises issues of what constitutes a rider on a model - I wrote as much initially, but decided to drop it for the sake of sticking to one RAW issue at a time. For example, one Ork Warbiker model comes with a grot hanging off the pole. Is that a second rider?

Johnnytorrance wrote:
So I've been cheating by loading my command squad with Grav guns and firing full salvo's?

Lol.

Y'all should stop the argument with this guy. I think it's more confusing to the OP.

OP: yes, you can have a SAG on a bike. In fact let me see if you convert one. I'm thinking of doing the same thing.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Waaagh 18 wrote:

 Dilt wrote:
There is nothing I see prohibiting a Big Mek from taking a Shokk Attack Gun on a Bike at all. They would have to issue an errata to specifically prohibit it.

In fact, I just found something better. Go in option order on the Big Mek's page. Go to the first set of list options. Take a Warbike. Then move down to the next option and change your choppa/slugga for Mega Armour. How did that happen?

Note how it says under Warbike that it cannot be taken if you have Mega Armour. Now note how there is no such restriction under Mega Armour. It does not say you may not take Mega Armour if you have taken a Warbike. By order of purchasing upgrades, you are not breaking rules. You do not have Mega Armour when you take your Warbike, so this is legal. Then it allows you, AFTER the option to take the warbike, to take Mega Armour, And nothing under Mega Armour says you cannot take it if you have a Warbike. And you don't suddenly lose your warbike - when you took it, you did not have Mega Armour.

That right there is more likely to be FAQ'd than a SAG on a Bike.

That seems like cheating and no one who actually knows the rules will play against it. Who cares what order you purchase them in? If you have both in the end it's not allowed.

Why is it cheating? What's the difference between a SAG on a bike and a Master of the forge on a bike with a conversion Beamer?

The rules state that a big Mek can have either a KFF or a SAG.
It also says they can get orky know wots and one of the pieces of gear is a warbike.

Does not say you can't have both and the war gears list has a bunch of * all over the place, giving exception to rules but no where does it say it's illegal to have a warbike and a SAG

No I meant it was illegal to have mega-armor and a warbiker.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

JinxDragon wrote:
Johnnytorrance,
Waagh 18 was directly responding to someone stating there is a loophole allowing Mega Armour and a Bike on one model, and not the Opening Posters mention of a Shock Attack Gun. Needless to state, taking a Mega Armour and Bike together is clearly 'that ******* guy' if someone seriously tried to argue the order of purchase allows us to get around a very obvious Restriction. This is based on the order which things are purchased, that it states the Model can not take instead of stating it can never be combined, and the fact the restriction is only found on one piece of Wargear and not the other.

Seeing as you mentioned being a Space Marine player, it would be the same as having a Terminator Armour clad Model on a Bike by claiming that the Bike was purchased first so it is all legal.

Exactly

 Ascalam wrote:


A relentless SAG toting Biker is possible, no matter how you dislike the concept. If you don't like the image of him packing it on a shoulder, visualise it as a sidecar

That is brilliant, I want to make one now with a sidecar filled with grots for the gun to shoot

Personally I'm picturing something more akin to this.

That's more the Blitzbike, but awesome anyway

Artillery-moped!