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.

Ok then I get to shoot your units who are embarked. If we're just making stuff up I might as well get some in too!

The tactical reserves rule only counts units inside transports for the purposes of it's rule, it's not a blanket change of the rules.

Remember, tactical reserves is for matched play only, it's not a game-wide rule.

Except that that is clearly covered by the "embarked units cannot normally be affected rule." Nice strawman, though. Man, you love those things.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
The fact that tactical reserves is only for matched play, or only a beta rule, doesn't change the fact that it clearly established that "units on the table," includes "units in transports on the table."

Please, show me where it says "for the purposes of this rule, include units in transports."

It doesn't. It references units on the battlefield, and specifically highlights units in transports on the battlefield as a subset of that.

But I'm not gonna argue with you anymore on this. Because this proves what I've long suspected: you don't care what the rules say, you just want to troll people.

Your argument basically boils down to "I don't like what the rule says, thus it can't be right." The transport rules LITERALLY tell you to remove units from the battlefield when they are embarked.

No, dude, that's your argument. My argument is "this is what the rule says, seriously, stop trying to pull any mental gymnastics you can to avoid admitting your were wrong, because we're all worried you're gonna dislocate something if you keep stretching"

AnFéasógMór wrote:
No, dude, that's your argument. My argument is "this is what the rule says, seriously, stop trying to pull any mental gymnastics you can to avoid admitting your were wrong, because we're all worried you're gonna dislocate something if you keep stretching"

To get back to the actual question. Do the rules, which clearly state that the embark unit is on the battlefield, explain where the unit is located? Is the unit inside the transport? Does this mean that if the transport is within 12" than the unit is also within 12"? Are you defending the position that one can declare a charge against units inside of a transport vehicle, or is this negated by the "embarked units cannot be affected?" If so, I don't think that declaring a charge affects the unit inside the embarked vehicle. Being charged does, which is why the unit that declared the charge will fail their charge, but it sounds like you agree that the unit in the transport can be measured to and can have a charge declared against them.

Also, your frustration with BaconCatBug will get you no where. You're both creating an environment that's getting less and less helpful with each reply. Respect the fact that he's still unconvinced or ignore him. If he's truly being a troll, if he truly knows he's wrong but cannot admit it, than why are you wasting your time on him?

The unit is inside the transport. For game purposes it does not exist at all until it disembarks and is deployed on the table - you cannot measure to it, target it, charge it, wave at it, hug it or do anything to it unless the transport itself has a unit that allows it to e.g. shoot out.

That's all there is to it. This is one of the least ambiguous things in 40K and no amount of "but what if" on an internet forum can change that!

 BaconCatBug wrote:
Unit inside a transport is NOT on the battlefield, it is just included for the purposes of Tactical Reserves Beta Rule.

This is correct.

FAQ addresses the issues with embarked units and TacRes interaction only. GW stands firm on the ruling that embarked units are not on the battlefield. This is observed in various places in the FAQ as affirmed.

Then what I had said previously was correct. In terms of the rules of this game, a unit embarked in a transport vehicle is not, in fact, inside the transport vehicle. Said unit merely counts as on the battlefield for the purpose of counting unit numbers and power levels for Tactical Reserves. In all practical purposes, the unit exists in an undefined point in spacetime.

Yes.

For the most part. Open topped vehicles can have special rules for how the passengers inside can shoot. That defines how to treat where the unit inside the transport is, but only for purposes of shooting from the open topped transport.

 skchsan wrote:

 BaconCatBug wrote:
Unit inside a transport is NOT on the battlefield, it is just included for the purposes of Tactical Reserves Beta Rule.

This is correct.

FAQ addresses the issues with embarked units and TacRes interaction only. GW stands firm on the ruling that embarked units are not on the battlefield. This is observed in various places in the FAQ as affirmed.

Care to actually quote or point to a single one of them?


Automatically Appended Next Post:
"Can't be affected" and "on the battlefield" are not mutually exclusive. The fact that they cannot be affected, measured to, etc, etc, is covered by the fact that the transports rule unambiguously states that they can't be affected, whether or not they are on the battlefield doesn't have anything to do with it.

AnFéasógMór wrote:

 skchsan wrote:

 BaconCatBug wrote:
Unit inside a transport is NOT on the battlefield, it is just included for the purposes of Tactical Reserves Beta Rule.

This is correct.

FAQ addresses the issues with embarked units and TacRes interaction only. GW stands firm on the ruling that embarked units are not on the battlefield. This is observed in various places in the FAQ as affirmed.

Care to actually quote or point to a single one of them?


Automatically Appended Next Post:
"Can't be affected" and "on the battlefield" are not mutually exclusive. The fact that they cannot be affected, measured to, etc, etc, is covered by the fact that the transports rule unambiguously states that they can't be affected, whether or not they are on the battlefield doesn't have anything to do with it.

Q: For the purposes of the Sudden Death rule, do units that are embarked within transports with the Flyer Battlefield Role count as being on the battlefield?
A: No.
Explanation - units that are embarked within transports do not count as being on the battlefield.
Counter argument - "well that only states its only for the purpose of sudden death rule, so it must not apply for all embarked units."
Rebuttal - "Well where does it say in the rule book that says only units that embarked a transport with the flyer battlefield role are not on the battlefield?"

Remember, FAQ VS errata: errata addresses the actual errors in the RAW. FAQ addresses what the RAI is intended to mean as RAW.

The FAQ affirms that embarked units are not on battlefield - if you don't have any models on the battlefield, you lose via sudden death > flyer is a model, and it has units inside it, therefore I have two units on the battlefield. > rule states flyers don't count towards having models in the battlefield for sudden death. Models embarked inside the flyer doesn't count towards having models on the battlefield not because the flyer itself doesn't count, but because embarking put the models 'not on the battlefield' as per RAW.

You're free to interpret that as you want. But the RAW is clear and the FAQ affirms & confirms it.

RejjeN wrote:

If you have 3 dudes base to base in a straight line the third guy wouldn't be able to fight unless you've got 25mm bases (while all marine sized infantry used to come on those, they should now be on 32mm bases. But of course, if you bought them with 25mm, go ahead I guess). However if you put them base to base in a diagonal pattern (I don't know how else to describe it...) they should be able to fight in 4 ranks
Found this picture that illustrates it better:

Wrong. Per page 182 of the BRB: "To target an enemy unit, the attacking model must either be within 1" of that unit, or within 1" of another model from its own unit that is itself within 1" of that enemy unit." [emphasis added]

 Cadian16th wrote:

RejjeN wrote:

If you have 3 dudes base to base in a straight line the third guy wouldn't be able to fight unless you've got 25mm bases (while all marine sized infantry used to come on those, they should now be on 32mm bases. But of course, if you bought them with 25mm, go ahead I guess). However if you put them base to base in a diagonal pattern (I don't know how else to describe it...) they should be able to fight in 4 ranks
Found this picture that illustrates it better:

Wrong. Per page 182 of the BRB: "To target an enemy unit, the attacking model must either be within 1" of that unit, or within 1" of another model from its own unit that is itself within 1" of that enemy unit." [emphasis added]

I don't believe the color-scheme was intended to show different units as my question was always only referring to a single unit charging another single unit.

 skchsan wrote:

AnFéasógMór wrote:

 skchsan wrote:

 BaconCatBug wrote:
Unit inside a transport is NOT on the battlefield, it is just included for the purposes of Tactical Reserves Beta Rule.

This is correct.

FAQ addresses the issues with embarked units and TacRes interaction only. GW stands firm on the ruling that embarked units are not on the battlefield. This is observed in various places in the FAQ as affirmed.

Care to actually quote or point to a single one of them?


Automatically Appended Next Post:
"Can't be affected" and "on the battlefield" are not mutually exclusive. The fact that they cannot be affected, measured to, etc, etc, is covered by the fact that the transports rule unambiguously states that they can't be affected, whether or not they are on the battlefield doesn't have anything to do with it.

Q: For the purposes of the Sudden Death rule, do units that are embarked within transports with the Flyer Battlefield Role count as being on the battlefield?
A: No <----this is the extent of what the FAQ actually says.
Explanation - units that are embarked within transports do not count as being on the battlefield.
Counter argument - "well that only states its only for the purpose of sudden death rule, so it must not apply for all embarked units."
Rebuttal - "Well where does it say in the rule book that says only units that embarked a transport with the flyer battlefield role are not on the battlefield?"

Fixed that for you. Seriously, people shouldn't need to tell you that tacking your own interpretation onto something as if it was RaW doesn't make it RaW. Literally all the FAQ tells us is that literally for the purposes of Sudden Death units embarked in Flyers do not count as being on the battlefield. That does not in any way equal "transports do not count as being on the battlefield," it means exactly what it says. It "affirms and confirms" absolutely nothing about whether or not units in Transports count as on the battlefield generally, because it clearly calls out a specific set of units(those embarked in Flyers) and specifies a single, isolated context in which this is true(for the purposes of Sudden Death).

The Tactical Reserves beta rule, on the other hand, contains no such qualifiers; it does not say "for the purposes of this rule," it does not call out any specific types of transports, it simply indicates, in clear English, that "units embarked in transports set up on the battlefield" are a subset of "units set up on the battlefield." As BCB is so fond of pointing out, 40k is a permissive ruleset; Sudden Death gives you a specific permission for the purposes of that rule to treat a specific type of unit as not being on the battlefield. Outside of that context, they are on the battlefield, however, as clearly "affirmed and confirmed" in the Tactical Reserves beta rule.

AnFéasógMór wrote:

 skchsan wrote:

AnFéasógMór wrote:

 skchsan wrote:

 BaconCatBug wrote:
Unit inside a transport is NOT on the battlefield, it is just included for the purposes of Tactical Reserves Beta Rule.

This is correct.

FAQ addresses the issues with embarked units and TacRes interaction only. GW stands firm on the ruling that embarked units are not on the battlefield. This is observed in various places in the FAQ as affirmed.

Care to actually quote or point to a single one of them?


Automatically Appended Next Post:
"Can't be affected" and "on the battlefield" are not mutually exclusive. The fact that they cannot be affected, measured to, etc, etc, is covered by the fact that the transports rule unambiguously states that they can't be affected, whether or not they are on the battlefield doesn't have anything to do with it.

Q: For the purposes of the Sudden Death rule, do units that are embarked within transports with the Flyer Battlefield Role count as being on the battlefield?
A: No <----this is the extent of what the FAQ actually says.
Explanation - units that are embarked within transports do not count as being on the battlefield.
Counter argument - "well that only states its only for the purpose of sudden death rule, so it must not apply for all embarked units."
Rebuttal - "Well where does it say in the rule book that says only units that embarked a transport with the flyer battlefield role are not on the battlefield?"

Fixed that for you. Seriously, people shouldn't need to tell you that tacking your own interpretation onto something as if it was RaW doesn't make it RaW. Literally all the FAQ tells us is that literally for the purposes of Sudden Death units embarked in Flyers do not count as being on the battlefield. That does not in any way equal "transports do not count as being on the battlefield," it means exactly what it says. It "affirms and confirms" absolutely nothing about whether or not units in Transports count as on the battlefield generally, because it clearly calls out a specific set of units(those embarked in Flyers) and specifies a single, isolated context in which this is true(for the purposes of Sudden Death).

The Tactical Reserves beta rule, on the other hand, contains no such qualifiers; it does not say "for the purposes of this rule," it does not call out any specific types of transports, it simply indicates, in clear English, that "units embarked in transports set up on the battlefield" are a subset of "units set up on the battlefield." As BCB is so fond of pointing out, 40k is a permissive ruleset; Sudden Death gives you a specific permission for the purposes of that rule to treat a specific type of unit as not being on the battlefield. Outside of that context, they are on the battlefield, however, as clearly "affirmed and confirmed" in the Tactical Reserves beta rule.

Except for the units that embark after the start of the game, where we are told they are removed from the battlefield. I guess their quantum state switches from "on" to "off" the battlefield once you hit turn one.

 doctortom wrote:

AnFéasógMór wrote:

 skchsan wrote:

AnFéasógMór wrote:

 skchsan wrote:

 BaconCatBug wrote:
Unit inside a transport is NOT on the battlefield, it is just included for the purposes of Tactical Reserves Beta Rule.

This is correct.

FAQ addresses the issues with embarked units and TacRes interaction only. GW stands firm on the ruling that embarked units are not on the battlefield. This is observed in various places in the FAQ as affirmed.

Care to actually quote or point to a single one of them?


Automatically Appended Next Post:
"Can't be affected" and "on the battlefield" are not mutually exclusive. The fact that they cannot be affected, measured to, etc, etc, is covered by the fact that the transports rule unambiguously states that they can't be affected, whether or not they are on the battlefield doesn't have anything to do with it.

Q: For the purposes of the Sudden Death rule, do units that are embarked within transports with the Flyer Battlefield Role count as being on the battlefield?
A: No <----this is the extent of what the FAQ actually says.
Explanation - units that are embarked within transports do not count as being on the battlefield.
Counter argument - "well that only states its only for the purpose of sudden death rule, so it must not apply for all embarked units."
Rebuttal - "Well where does it say in the rule book that says only units that embarked a transport with the flyer battlefield role are not on the battlefield?"

Fixed that for you. Seriously, people shouldn't need to tell you that tacking your own interpretation onto something as if it was RaW doesn't make it RaW. Literally all the FAQ tells us is that literally for the purposes of Sudden Death units embarked in Flyers do not count as being on the battlefield. That does not in any way equal "transports do not count as being on the battlefield," it means exactly what it says. It "affirms and confirms" absolutely nothing about whether or not units in Transports count as on the battlefield generally, because it clearly calls out a specific set of units(those embarked in Flyers) and specifies a single, isolated context in which this is true(for the purposes of Sudden Death).

The Tactical Reserves beta rule, on the other hand, contains no such qualifiers; it does not say "for the purposes of this rule," it does not call out any specific types of transports, it simply indicates, in clear English, that "units embarked in transports set up on the battlefield" are a subset of "units set up on the battlefield." As BCB is so fond of pointing out, 40k is a permissive ruleset; Sudden Death gives you a specific permission for the purposes of that rule to treat a specific type of unit as not being on the battlefield. Outside of that context, they are on the battlefield, however, as clearly "affirmed and confirmed" in the Tactical Reserves beta rule.

Except for the units that embark after the start of the game, where we are told they are removed from the battlefield. I guess their quantum state switches from "on" to "off" the battlefield once you hit turn one.

Except that being told to physically remove the model from the table doesn't change the fact that for rules purposes, we now have confirmation, via the TR beta rule, that units embarked in transports are included in "models on the battlefield.

The real world status of the models =/= the rules status of the models. Or do people expect me to physically set my Scourges up "flying high in the skies" when I deploy them?

In this case "remove the model from the battlefield" is a real world, physical instruction. TR tells us that for rules purposes, they are still on the battlefield.

It tells you for one specific rules purpose to count an embarked unit as on the battlefield, that being calculating what % of your army is in reserve.

For all other rules purposes an embarked unit is simply ‘not there’, unless a Transport has special rules that allow them to do something.

Please stop trying to prove otherwise, as there is no way to do so!

Well, technically, 2 specific rules - for determining how many can go into reserves during deployment, and for (not) being destroyed at the end of turn 3 if they're still huddling in their transport. But basically yes, for these purposes only they count. They haven't done a general overriding of what's said in the embarking and disembarking rules as not being able to affect or be affected by things on the board unless there's a special rules giving an exemption (such as an open topped rule letting them shoot.)

 doctortom wrote:
Well, technically, 2 specific rules - for determining how many can go into reserves during deployment, and for (not) being destroyed at the end of turn 3 if they're still huddling in their transport. But basically yes, for these purposes only they count. They haven't done a general overriding of what's said in the embarking and disembarking rules as not being able to affect or be affected by things on the board unless there's a special rules giving an exemption (such as an open topped rule letting them shoot.)

Good shout!

JohnnyHell wrote:

 doctortom wrote:
Well, technically, 2 specific rules - for determining how many can go into reserves during deployment, and for (not) being destroyed at the end of turn 3 if they're still huddling in their transport. But basically yes, for these purposes only they count. They haven't done a general overriding of what's said in the embarking and disembarking rules as not being able to affect or be affected by things on the board unless there's a special rules giving an exemption (such as an open topped rule letting them shoot.)

Good shout!

Which is literally my entire point. Those are the only two rules that take into account whether or not the models are "on the battlefield," so what the hell else would I have been talking about? Every other interaction involving embarked units is covered by other rules (e.g., units in transports not being able to affect or be affected by things). Acknowledging the clear fact that TR clarifies that units in transports are on the battlefield literally has zero bearing on those things. Why the hell would anybody assume that saying "models in transports count as being on the battlefield," which has literally all to do with whether or not they can affect things was intended to mean that there has been "a general overriding of what's said in the embarking and disembarking rules?"

I'm literally the one who pointed out that you still cannot affect models inside a transport, hence you can't charge them. Me pointing out that BCB is wrong about them being on that battlefield has absolutely nothing to do with that, I'm just trying to head him off before he starts in on some nonsensical screed about how they're on the table for counting half your army, but not on the table for the purposes of the Turn 3 rule, so that he can keep insisting his opponents either have to disembark from their transports or else die.

AnFéasógMór wrote:

JohnnyHell wrote:

 doctortom wrote:
Well, technically, 2 specific rules - for determining how many can go into reserves during deployment, and for (not) being destroyed at the end of turn 3 if they're still huddling in their transport. But basically yes, for these purposes only they count. They haven't done a general overriding of what's said in the embarking and disembarking rules as not being able to affect or be affected by things on the board unless there's a special rules giving an exemption (such as an open topped rule letting them shoot.)

Good shout!

Which is literally my entire point. Those are the only two rules that take into account whether or not the models are "on the battlefield," so what the hell else would I have been talking about? Every other interaction involving embarked units is covered by other rules (e.g., units in transports not being able to affect or be affected by things). Acknowledging the clear fact that TR clarifies that units in transports are on the battlefield literally has zero bearing on those things. Why the hell would anybody assume that saying "models in transports count as being on the battlefield," which has literally all to do with whether or not they can affect things was intended to mean that there has been "a general overriding of what's said in the embarking and disembarking rules?"

I'm literally the one who pointed out that you still cannot affect models inside a transport, hence you can't charge them. Me pointing out that BCB is wrong about them being on that battlefield has absolutely nothing to do with that, I'm just trying to head him off before he starts in on some nonsensical screed about how they're on the table for counting half your army, but not on the table for the purposes of the Turn 3 rule, so that he can keep insisting his opponents either have to disembark from their transports or else die.

Uh, the entire sections for psychic powers, shooting and close combat are based on whether models are "on the battlefield". Control of objectives is based on models on the battlefield. Use of special abilities is based on being on the battlefield. None of which apply to the embarked unit. (EDIT: An embarked unit wouldn't keep you from shooting at a character, though the transport itself would. That might be a factor when dealing with buildings, actually) Saying they count on the board, oh yeah, except for this stuff, seems pretty ridiculous.

 doctortom wrote:

AnFéasógMór wrote:

JohnnyHell wrote:

 doctortom wrote:
Well, technically, 2 specific rules - for determining how many can go into reserves during deployment, and for (not) being destroyed at the end of turn 3 if they're still huddling in their transport. But basically yes, for these purposes only they count. They haven't done a general overriding of what's said in the embarking and disembarking rules as not being able to affect or be affected by things on the board unless there's a special rules giving an exemption (such as an open topped rule letting them shoot.)

Good shout!

Which is literally my entire point. Those are the only two rules that take into account whether or not the models are "on the battlefield," so what the hell else would I have been talking about? Every other interaction involving embarked units is covered by other rules (e.g., units in transports not being able to affect or be affected by things). Acknowledging the clear fact that TR clarifies that units in transports are on the battlefield literally has zero bearing on those things. Why the hell would anybody assume that saying "models in transports count as being on the battlefield," which has literally all to do with whether or not they can affect things was intended to mean that there has been "a general overriding of what's said in the embarking and disembarking rules?"

I'm literally the one who pointed out that you still cannot affect models inside a transport, hence you can't charge them. Me pointing out that BCB is wrong about them being on that battlefield has absolutely nothing to do with that, I'm just trying to head him off before he starts in on some nonsensical screed about how they're on the table for counting half your army, but not on the table for the purposes of the Turn 3 rule, so that he can keep insisting his opponents either have to disembark from their transports or else die.

Uh, the entire sections for psychic powers, shooting and close combat are based on whether models are "on the battlefield". Control of objectives is based on models on the battlefield. Use of special abilities is based on being on the battlefield. None of which apply to the embarked unit. (EDIT: An embarked unit wouldn't keep you from shooting at a character, though the transport itself would. That might be a factor when dealing with buildings, actually) Saying they count on the board, oh yeah, except for this stuff, seems pretty ridiculous.

And explain to me how any of those other rules get around "cannot do anything or be affected."

The fact that the models are on the battlefield does not lift that restriction. It does not change anything other than the two things that don't care about anything other than whether the models are on the battlefield or not.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
It's worth noting that without acknowledging that they are generally on the battlefield, models still die at the end of turn 3. After all, per BCB's logic, TR only tells us to consider them on the battlefield for the purposes of determining that half the army is on the table. Without acknowledging that that is unqualified by the language used, we cannot apply it any more to the "Turn 3" rule a paragraph later than we can to any other moment in the game.

There are only two options, either they are on the battlefield generally (as shown by the fact that the first paragraph gives an unqualified clarification, not a "for this purpose") or they are only on the battlefield for determining if half your army is on the battlefield.

Units on the battlefield can control objectives. Objectives aren't units so therefore the rule for embarked units not affecting other units within a certain range doesn't apply. Yet, they can't control objectives while in a transport.

EDIT: Also, if a character with Grand Strategist is in the vehicle, you will now probably get somebody saying he can roll to get back CP for his side while in the transport.

 doctortom wrote:
Units on the battlefield can control objectives. Objectives aren't units so therefore the rule for embarked units not affecting other units within a certain range doesn't apply. Yet, they can't control objectives while in a transport.

Except that the rules for embarked units don't say "embarked units cannot normally do anything to other units or be affected in any way by other units," they just say "embarked units cannot normally do anything or be affected in any way." The fact that "objectives aren't units" is utterly irrelevant.

EDIT: Also, if a character with Grand Strategist is in the vehicle, you will now probably get somebody saying he can roll to get back CP for his side while in the transport.

And? I see no reason to assume that is not correct and as intended. Look at the similar Labarynthine Cunning, which they already errata'ed from "is alive" to "is on the battlefield." Nothing would have stopped them from adding "and is not in a transport," if that was the intent. You're working from a conclusion and trying to use it to prove the premise it relies on. "A warlord in a transport can't regenerate CP because they aren't on the battlefield, as proven by the fact that if they were on the battlefield they'd be able to regenerate CP, which they can't, because they aren't on the battlefield." It's completely circular reasoning.