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.

Oberron wrote:


Transports can only carry Infantry models. That's why you can't carry imperial knights or dreadnoughts or wraithknights. What it can transport is quite clear. As for trying to embark on a transport there is also rules for that "Only Infantrymodels can embark upon Transports (this does not include Jump or Jet pack Infantry), unless specifically stated otherwise." How do we embark? look at the Embarking rules.

You can't carry jump infantry unless stated just like you can't carry a dreadnought unless stated....you can't argue for one then against the other....

You strike me as the sort of player id legitimately slap, pack up my models and then leave when playing against.

 NightHowler wrote:
Trolling indeed.

But it does a very good job of illustrating exactly why taking the idea of RAW to the extreme is a terrible idea. The rules are imperfectly written (to put it politely).

I'm curious if the people arguing that the step of embarking can be skipped would agree that I can attach the Independent Character riptide to my firewarriors, keep them in reserves and have them be embarked in their dedicated transport.

No not trolling just trying to figure things out. The riptide attached to firewarriors and trying to have them carried by a transport is ly breaking the rule "A Transport can carry a single Infantry unit and/or any number of Independent Characters (as long as they are also Infantry), up to a total number of models equal to the vehicle's Transport Capacity."

What can be carried by a transport is as RAW the quote above and has no relations to "Embarking" the rule, just what can be carried.

sm3g wrote:


You can't carry jump infantry unless stated just like you can't carry a dreadnought unless stated....you can't argue for one then against the other....

Dreadnoughts can't ever be carried in a Transport unless stated as you said. Because of the rule "A Transport can carry a single Infantry unit and/or any number of Independent Characters ([u]as long as they are also Infantry[/u]), up to a total number of models equal to the vehicle's Transport Capacity."

Jump-Infantry can't embark on Transports there is a rule for that. I am not argueing for jump-Infantry I am arguing if it is possiable to avoid the "Embarking" rule or if in order to be carried by a Transport you must follow the "Embarking" rule.

so much trolling.

So what is the effective difference between going through the "embarking" step and just starting the game "embarked"

Effectively, what changes? What would be allowed or disallowed by doing it one way over the other?

EDIT:

And for the record, Embarking takes place in the movement phase. Before the game there is no movement phase. So it would be impossible to go through your so called "embarking" step pre-game.

Oberron wrote:

 NightHowler wrote:
Trolling indeed.

But it does a very good job of illustrating exactly why taking the idea of RAW to the extreme is a terrible idea. The rules are imperfectly written (to put it politely).

I'm curious if the people arguing that the step of embarking can be skipped would agree that I can attach the Independent Character riptide to my firewarriors, keep them in reserves and have them be embarked in their dedicated transport.

No not trolling just trying to figure things out. The riptide attached to firewarriors and trying to have them carried by a transport is ly breaking the rule "A Transport can carry a single Infantry unit and/or any number of Independent Characters (as long as they are also Infantry), up to a total number of models equal to the vehicle's Transport Capacity."

What can be carried by a transport is as RAW the quote above and has no relations to "Embarking" the rule, just what can be carried.

sm3g wrote:


You can't carry jump infantry unless stated just like you can't carry a dreadnought unless stated....you can't argue for one then against the other....

Dreadnoughts can't ever be carried in a Transport unless stated as you said. Because of the rule "A Transport can carry a single Infantry unit and/or any number of Independent Characters ([u]as long as they are also Infantry[/u]), up to a total number of models equal to the vehicle's Transport Capacity."

Jump-Infantry can't embark on Transports there is a rule for that. I am not argueing for jump-Infantry I am arguing if it is possiable to avoid the "Embarking" rule or if in order to be carried by a Transport you must follow the "Embarking" rule.

Jump Infantry has a different entry to Infantry in the book so the transport can't carry them.

 Icculus wrote:
so much trolling.

So what is the effective difference between going through the "embarking" step and just starting the game "embarked"

Effectively, what changes? What would be allowed or disallowed by doing it one way over the other?

EDIT:

And for the record, Embarking takes place in the movement phase. Before the game there is no movement phase. So it would be impossible to go through your so called "embarking" step pre-game.

The underlined sentence is exactly what I have been asking

As for the what changes and what would be allowed or disallowed by doing it one way over the other? There would be clarification between "Embarking" the rule, and being embarked/carried.

If it is impossible to go through the "Embarking" the rule, step as you said, rigeld2 on the first page is saying you have you go through the embarking pocess to be embarked

rigeld2 wrote:

There is no loophole - there only is if you assume it's possible to be embarked without following the embark rules.

Edit:

sm3g wrote:


Jump Infantry has a different entry to Infantry in the book so the transport can't carry them.

I'm not arguing that and I don't want to turn this into the locked thread that was posted on the first page.
As a minor correction the entry is Jump Units but I understand Jump Infantry and jump units is pretty much interchangeable.

In which case I am failing to see the point of this thread, what are you hoping to achieve here exactly? What rule are you trying to clarify and for what purpose, give us the scenario...

sm3g wrote:
In which case I am failing to see the point of this thread, what are you hoping to achieve here exactly? What rule are you trying to clarify and for what purpose, give us the scenario...

I guess the rule I want to clarify the most is the "Combined Reserve Units" rule namely this line "Similarly, you must specify if any units in Reserve are embarked upon any Transport vehicles in Reserve, in which case they will arrive together." the underlined part the most, Does this rule skip the "Embarking" rule on how to embark, and does it just make the unit on it simply embarked/carried without having to go through the "Embarking" process.

I already gave a scenario of the lychguard and the night scythe. Do the lychguard ever go through the "Embarking" the rule, process to embark on the DT?

Edit: If i need to change the Title of this thread because of confusion I will but I am unsure what to change it to.

Oberron wrote:

sm3g wrote:
In which case I am failing to see the point of this thread, what are you hoping to achieve here exactly? What rule are you trying to clarify and for what purpose, give us the scenario...

I guess the rule I want to clarify the most is the "Combined Reserve Units" rule namely this line "Similarly, you must specify if any units in Reserve are embarked upon any Transport vehicles in Reserve, in which case they will arrive together." the underlined part the most, Does this rule skip the "Embarking" rule on how to embark, and does it just make the unit on it simply embarked/carried without having to go through the "Embarking" process.

I already gave a scenario of the lychguard and the night scythe. Do the lychguard ever go through the "Embarking" the rule, process to embark on the DT?

Edit: If i need to change the Title of this thread because of confusion I will but I am unsure what to change it to.

And what difference would it make in game whether or not your Lychguard went through the embarking process?

Oberron wrote:
Dreadnoughts can't ever be carried in a Transport unless stated as you said. Because of the rule "A Transport can carry a single Infantry unit and/or any number of Independent Characters ([u]as long as they are also Infantry[/u]), up to a total number of models equal to the vehicle's Transport Capacity."

Note that the word 'only' does not appear anywhere in that rule.

That rule is giving you permission to include ICs along with an Infantry unit. That's all.

The rule that limits it to infantry is the one further on, that says they're the only units who can embark while specifically excluding Jump Infantry.


So if a codex entry simply says that the transport can carry 'X models' there would be nothing that would specify what unit type those models have to be. So if you have some way of getting models onto the transport without following the embarking rules, you could indeed put whatever unit type you want in there.



That's the 'probems' that I referred to in my first post. If you argue that you can skip the embarking rules when deploying straight into the transport, silliness ensues.

sm3g wrote:

Oberron wrote:

sm3g wrote:
In which case I am failing to see the point of this thread, what are you hoping to achieve here exactly? What rule are you trying to clarify and for what purpose, give us the scenario...

I guess the rule I want to clarify the most is the "Combined Reserve Units" rule namely this line "Similarly, you must specify if any units in Reserve are embarked upon any Transport vehicles in Reserve, in which case they will arrive together." the underlined part the most, Does this rule skip the "Embarking" rule on how to embark, and does it just make the unit on it simply embarked/carried without having to go through the "Embarking" process.

I already gave a scenario of the lychguard and the night scythe. Do the lychguard ever go through the "Embarking" the rule, process to embark on the DT?

Edit: If i need to change the Title of this thread because of confusion I will but I am unsure what to change it to.

And what difference would it make in game whether or not your Lychguard went through the embarking process?

Because there is no movement phase pre-deployment and they aren't on the table to be able to follow the "Embarking" rules.

(Does it help any if I said I recently traded for a nightscythe and Lychguard and I've never used a flyer before....?)

 insaniak wrote:

Oberron wrote:
Dreadnoughts can't ever be carried in a Transport unless stated as you said. Because of the rule "A Transport can carry a single Infantry unit and/or any number of Independent Characters ([u]as long as they are also Infantry[/u]), up to a total number of models equal to the vehicle's Transport Capacity."

Note that the word 'only' does not appear anywhere in that rule.

That rule is giving you permission to include ICs along with an Infantry unit. That's all.

The rule that limits it to infantry is the one further on, that says they're the only units who can embark while specifically excluding Jump Infantry.


So if a codex entry simply says that the transport can carry 'X models' there would be nothing that would specify what unit type those models have to be. So if you have some way of getting models onto the transport without following the embarking rules, you could indeed put whatever unit type you want in there.



That's the 'probems' that I referred to in my first post. If you argue that you can skip the embarking rules when deploying straight into the transport, silliness ensues.

I see where your coming from now with the problems, but isn't that a round-a-bout method of saying "it doesn't tell me I can't do it"? We have permission for Infantry units and IC that are also Infantry units nothing else. Silliness ensues if you assume you have to go through the "Embarking" rules as well because of the "Combined Reserve Units" saying the unit is embarked on a transport before the first movement phase happens


Edited for errors

Oberron wrote:
We have permission for Infantry units and IC that are also Infantry units nothing else.

If you ignore the Embarking rules, each codex gives you permission for their transport vehicles to carry anything that is a 'model'.


It's not a case of 'it doesn't say I can't' ... It's a case of one rule giving you permission to carry an infantry unit and attached ICs, and another rule giving you permission to carry everything else.

If you ignore the embarking rules that limit it to infantry.

Oberron wrote:


Because there is no movement phase pre-deployment and they aren't on the table to be able to follow the "Embarking" rules.

(Does it help any if I said I recently traded for a nightscythe and Lychguard and I've never used a flyer before....?)

No...I am still really struggling to see why it matters/how its relevant (unless there is some funky rule regarding Lychguard that is only relevant if they have embarked?)... Like ....They start the game on the transport in reserve...what different to the game does it make whether or not they went through an embarking process or not before the game?

Going through the embarking step never happens. And even if it did happen it wouldn't change anything.

Here is the answer to your question:
No. You don't follow the rules for "embarking" you just start the game inside the transport. HOWEVER, you must still follow all the rules for what models can still be inside the vehicle.

Don't make this more complicated than it has to be.

The more pertinent case to this discussion is whether Praetorians (jump infantry) can deploy in the dedicated transport on their profile.

 insaniak wrote:

Oberron wrote:
We have permission for Infantry units and IC that are also Infantry units nothing else.

If you ignore the Embarking rules, each codex gives you permission for their transport vehicles to carry anything that is a 'model'.


It's not a case of 'it doesn't say I can't' ... It's a case of one rule giving you permission to carry an infantry unit and attached ICs, and another rule giving you permission to carry everything else.

If you ignore the embarking rules that limit it to infantry.

Ok i understand that, can you explain to me how to use the "Embarking" rule then with "Combine Reserve Units" because as I see it if you can't ignore the "Embarking" rule you can't deploy inside a Transport in reserves.

 Icculus wrote:
Going through the embarking step never happens. And even if it did happen it wouldn't change anything.

Here is the answer to your question:
No. You don't follow the rules for "embarking" you just start the game inside the transport. HOWEVER, you must still follow all the rules for what models can still be inside the vehicle.

Don't make this more complicated than it has to be.

That's what I was thinking but some others seem to disagree.

sm3g wrote:

Oberron wrote:


Because there is no movement phase pre-deployment and they aren't on the table to be able to follow the "Embarking" rules.

(Does it help any if I said I recently traded for a nightscythe and Lychguard and I've never used a flyer before....?)

No...I am still really struggling to see why it matters/how its relevant (unless there is some funky rule regarding Lychguard that is only relevant if they have embarked?)... Like ....They start the game on the transport in reserve...what different to the game does it make whether or not they went through an embarking process or not before the game?

Because then no one can deploy on transports in reserves if you have to go through the "Embarking" rule to do so.

Oberron wrote:
You can't skip the maximum capacity "Each Transport vehicle has a maximum passenger capacity that can never be exceeded." That is pretty clear and has nothing to do with the "Embarking" rule or being embarked. If it is EVER exceeded you are breaking a rule.

And part of that capacity, by definition (and I've quoted it, so unless you're failing to read the rules both in the rulebook and in these posts you've seen it) is the restriction against Jump Infantry.
You can't have one without the other.

So all this was because you read the rules and through some crazy rules lawyering thought you found a loophole that stated that vehicles coming in from reserves are not allowed to carry passengers.

Well that is incorrect. the "Embarking" rules are only for those models on the board and during one of the game turns. Units can always begin the game in a transport.

Before the game begins you declare what units are in reserve, and what infantry are in which vehicles. That's where they start the game: in reserve, in a vehicle.

Why didnt you bring this up from the very beginning when we asked you what the purpose was of all this rigmarole?

so ... does this mean I can now put my IK in a drop pod and assault the turn it drops? I think I want to cherry pick rules too, while we are at it I am going to lower the point value of the IK to about 60 points and call it a day.

The transports can not be embarked by anything that is not Infantry without permission ... it does not matter if it can be taken as a DT by a unit that can not use it or not.

 OIIIIIIO wrote:
so ... does this mean I can now put my IK in a drop pod and assault the turn it drops? I think I want to cherry pick rules too, while we are at it I am going to lower the point value of the IK to about 60 points and call it a day.

The transports can not be embarked by anything that is not Infantry without permission ... it does not matter if it can be taken as a DT by a unit that can not use it or not.

I dont think anyone was trying to argue for those points in this thread. Well oberron wasnt anyway.

So the line we're trying to get around is "Only Infantry models can embark upon Transports (this does not include Jump or Jet Infantry" (emphasis mine), is that the point of this question? A semantic argument to get around a mistake in the Necron Codex? Some sort of loophole that you'll have to spend half an hour arguing with your opponent about before each game?

Either:
1) GW meant for Jump Infantry to be able to embark into a Night Scythe, but forgot to add the rule.
2) GW forgot that making Lychguard Jump Infantry would stop them being able to embark, and so didn't remove the Dedicated Transport option.
3) Lychguard were never meant to be Jump Infantry.

So until we get a FAQ (hahahahahaha!), house-rule it with your gaming group. Any TO will be doing the same.

 Quanar wrote:
So the line we're trying to get around is "Only Infantry models can embark upon Transports (this does not include Jump or Jet Infantry" (emphasis mine), is that the point of this question? A semantic argument to get around a mistake in the Necron Codex? Some sort of loophole that you'll have to spend half an hour arguing with your opponent about before each game?

Either:
1) GW meant for Jump Infantry to be able to embark into a Night Scythe, but forgot to add the rule.
2) GW forgot that making Lychguard Jump Infantry would stop them being able to embark, and so didn't remove the Dedicated Transport option.
3) Lychguard were never meant to be Jump Infantry.

So until we get a FAQ (hahahahahaha!), house-rule it with your gaming group. Any TO will be doing the same.

You forgot 4) Having a Dedicated Transport option doesn't mean you're allowed to embark - 30 man Boyz squads have been able to tell you that for a while now.

 Quanar wrote:
So the line we're trying to get around is "Only Infantry models can embark upon Transports (this does not include Jump or Jet Infantry" (emphasis mine), is that the point of this question? A semantic argument to get around a mistake in the Necron Codex? Some sort of loophole that you'll have to spend half an hour arguing with your opponent about before each game?

Either:
1) GW meant for Jump Infantry to be able to embark into a Night Scythe, but forgot to add the rule.
2) GW forgot that making Lychguard Jump Infantry would stop them being able to embark, and so didn't remove the Dedicated Transport option.
3) Lychguard were never meant to be Jump Infantry.

So until we get a FAQ (hahahahahaha!), house-rule it with your gaming group. Any TO will be doing the same.

Triarch Praetorians, not Lychguard My personal opinion is that they were removing the option that the Night Scythe had in the previous codex allowing it to transport Jump Infantry and Jetbikes and missed removing it as a dedicated transport option for the Triarch Praetorians.

EDIT: Just rechecked the old codex and Triarch Praetorians did not have the option to take a Night Scythe as a dedicated transport so I'm not so sure what their intentions were anymore.

 Ghaz wrote:

 Quanar wrote:
So the line we're trying to get around is "Only Infantry models can embark upon Transports (this does not include Jump or Jet Infantry" (emphasis mine), is that the point of this question? A semantic argument to get around a mistake in the Necron Codex? Some sort of loophole that you'll have to spend half an hour arguing with your opponent about before each game?

Either:
1) GW meant for Jump Infantry to be able to embark into a Night Scythe, but forgot to add the rule.
2) GW forgot that making Lychguard Jump Infantry would stop them being able to embark, and so didn't remove the Dedicated Transport option.
3) Lychguard were never meant to be Jump Infantry.

So until we get a FAQ (hahahahahaha!), house-rule it with your gaming group. Any TO will be doing the same.

Triarch Praetorians, not Lychguard My personal opinion is that they were removing the option that the Night Scythe had in the previous codex allowing it to transport Jump Infantry and Jetbikes and missed removing it as a dedicated transport option for the Triarch Praetorians.

EDIT: Just rechecked the old codex and Triarch Praetorians did not have the option to take a Night Scythe as a dedicated transport so I'm not so sure what their intentions were anymore.

If the dedicated transport is the recent add, it seems obvious the Praetorians are meant to be able to ride in their own transport.

If that is not patently obvious then let's proceed with finding a specific rule that disallows me from deploying the Praetorians in their dedicated transport. Following RAW strictly they can be deployed in their dedicated transport.

col_impact wrote:
If the dedicated transport is the recent add, it seems obvious the Praetorians are meant to be able to ride in their own transport.

If that is not patently obvious then let's proceed with finding a specific rule that disallows me from deploying the Praetorians in their dedicated transport. Following RAW strictly they can be deployed in their dedicated transport.

I don't see a single rule ever quoted allowing you to ignore Transport Capacity. Even you've admitted the Transport Capacity rule applies, you just only want to apply part of it.

For no reason. In other words, you're making things up and refuse to admit it.

And the permission to embark on a Night Scythe is a recent deletion so you're back at square one.

 Ghaz wrote:
And the permission to embark on a Night Scythe is a recent deletion so you're back at square one.

The rules are on my side. You need to find a rule that blocks me from simply deploying them in the Night Scythe. At no point am I actually embarking them by deploying them in the Night Scythe.

col_impact wrote:

 Ghaz wrote:
And the permission to embark on a Night Scythe is a recent deletion so you're back at square one.

The rules are on my side. You need to find a rule that blocks me from simply deploying them in the Night Scythe. At no point am I actually embarking them by deploying them in the Night Scythe.

St. Celestine in a Land Raider in Reserve with a group of Seraphim.



So exciting!

EDIT:

It is also worth noting that the Mechanicum list has had Jet Pack infantry with access to a DT for a while now, but no one whom I know who plays it claims that they can ever be in said transport - they just treat it as a free Objective Secured Triaros.

col_impact wrote:

 Ghaz wrote:
And the permission to embark on a Night Scythe is a recent deletion so you're back at square one.

The rules are on my side. You need to find a rule that blocks me from simply deploying them in the Night Scythe. At no point am I actually embarking them by deploying them in the Night Scythe.

I disagree. You've failed to prove allowance for ignoring part of the Transport Capacity rules, or picking and choosing which rules to follow.

rigeld2 wrote:

col_impact wrote:

 Ghaz wrote:
And the permission to embark on a Night Scythe is a recent deletion so you're back at square one.

The rules are on my side. You need to find a rule that blocks me from simply deploying them in the Night Scythe. At no point am I actually embarking them by deploying them in the Night Scythe.

I disagree. You've failed to prove allowance for ignoring part of the Transport Capacity rules, or picking and choosing which rules to follow.

Point out in the rules where I am required to go through the process of embarking the Praetorians.

col_impact wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:

col_impact wrote:

 Ghaz wrote:
And the permission to embark on a Night Scythe is a recent deletion so you're back at square one.

The rules are on my side. You need to find a rule that blocks me from simply deploying them in the Night Scythe. At no point am I actually embarking them by deploying them in the Night Scythe.

I disagree. You've failed to prove allowance for ignoring part of the Transport Capacity rules, or picking and choosing which rules to follow.

Point out in the rules where I am required to go through the process of embarking the Praetorians.

Which isn't anything like what I just said.

Are you also arguing that I could fit 30 boyz in a Truck?