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.

can a unit with rage embark on a transport if it is within 2" of that transports access point at the begining of thier move? how about at the end of their move? i cant really find anything about it.

Thanks in advance.

They must move as fast as possible towards the closest visible enemy. If they can see an enemy then they won't be getting on board.

You can use the transport to block LoS to all enemies, then they can move as normal. Or, after moving them towards the enemy you can face them all backwards. Next turn there won't be any enemies in LoS. More than a bit cheesy.

That said, Mad Doc Grotsnik has a special rule that is basically the same as rage (except he doesn't even need to see them) The ork FAQ has the following to say about transports:

ork_FAQ wrote:Q. Can Grotsnik board a vehicle if doing so will get him closer to the nearest enemy than if he moved normally?
A. In the spirit of the rule, if embarking in a vehicle will not prevent him from charging that turn and will also get him closer to the nearest enemy than moving normally that turn, he may do that. Once aboard, the vehicle must always move in such a way as to move as fast as possible towards the closest enemy and allow Grotsnik to disembark and charge the closest enemy as soon as possible.

However, note that this is not automatically applicable to other codexes and it is very much a spirit of the rule (as opposed to letter of the rule) way of playing it. If you wanted to play like this I would definitely discuss it with your opponent first.

If there is no enemy visible to them, they are free to move and/or embark onto whatever they please.

If there is a visible enemy, they are forced to move towards them as fast as possible. While you could argue that embarking onto a transport would qualify for that so long as the transport then moves towards the enemy, I doubt it was what was intended by the rule. Rage is supposed to denote mindlessly racing in to go toth and claw with the enemy.

So no, I wouldn't be embarking as a part of a Raging model's movement.


Edit: Then again, the Grotsnik ruling is a good suggestion of intent here... If the studio's willing to go that route for him, I see no reason to not apply it to Rage as well.

This situation has a number of gray area issues.

As I see it the key points are:
-Embarkation is not movement
-Embarkation ends the Rage issue
-Rage does not preclude embarkation
-No order of events is specified for moving Rage units

Embarkation doesn't count as movement for the infantry (since then the tank could not move after they got on) so presumably after moving them in accordance with their rules a transport could move alongside them and they could hop in. This interpretation has the advantage of breaking no rules.

I dislike using the Grotsnik ruling as any sort of precedent, both as those are inconsistent and as Grotsnik does not have the USR in discussion but a special rule with different restrictions.

Jack

Jackmojo wrote:Embarkation doesn't count as movement for the infantry (since then the tank could not move after they got on) so presumably after moving them in accordance with their rules a transport could move alongside them and they could hop in. This interpretation has the advantage of breaking no rules.

Actually, it does.

Embarking doesn't in itself count as movement, but it does happen during the model's movement. And once you've moved a unit and gone on to the next, that first unit's movement is finished. You can't go back and change it (rulebook, page 11).

Scott-S6 wrote:Or, after moving them towards the enemy you can face them all backwards. Next turn there won't be any enemies in LoS. More than a bit cheesy.

I don't see what facing them away from the enemy has to do with anything since (assuming they're infantry) they have 360 degree LOS.

I also see no problem with them moving towards the closest enemy and if they end their movement within 2" of a vehicle then embarking. Nothing in the rage rule precludes them from embarking after they've moved.

ok so since they ignore rage if no enemy is visible i just have to position my stormraven in thier LoS and then they can act normally.

However if they can see an enemy and i move my stormraven 6" from their current location in the direction of the closest visible enemy, then after they move their 6" if they are within 2" of my access points they should be able to embark thoughts?

Synnister wrote:I don't see what facing them away from the enemy has to do with anything since (assuming they're infantry) they have 360 degree LOS.

This is a common misconception. But while it is how the game is commonly played, it's not actually true. Infantry don't have a defined LOS arc. Instead, we're simply told that they should be turned to face their target in the shooting phase.

How we are supposed to determine what the model can see for situations other than shooting is not covered by the rules. Some players take this to mean that the LOS rules should apply, in which case infantry models can only see what they are actually facing. The problem with this approach is that without a defined arc of sight, it's left up to the player to determine just how far to the sides the model can see.

Others take the more liberal approach that being allowed to turn and face your target essentially does give them a 360 degree arc of sight in practice if not in writing, and so that's good enough.

What that boils down to is that you shouldn't just assume that your opponent will agree with you that your models have a 360 degree arc of sight. If you or your opponent are running models with Rage, I would strongly recommend discussing this before the game begins.

Synnister wrote:

Scott-S6 wrote:Or, after moving them towards the enemy you can face them all backwards. Next turn there won't be any enemies in LoS. More than a bit cheesy.

I don't see what facing them away from the enemy has to do with anything since (assuming they're infantry) they have 360 degree LOS.

I also see no problem with them moving towards the closest enemy and if they end their movement within 2" of a vehicle then embarking. Nothing in the rage rule precludes them from embarking after they've moved.

Not cheesey if its a Death Company Dreadnought, since they have a specific facing and LoS, though i expose the dreads rear armor to the enemy that way.

insaniak wrote:Actually, it does.

Embarking doesn't in itself count as movement, but it does happen during the model's movement. And once you've moved a unit and gone on to the next, that first unit's movement is finished. You can't go back and change it (rulebook, page 11).

A units movement is finished once you've gone on to the next unit, but if embarkation is not movement then that restriction doesn't apply. You may be right though, as I said I find this interaction relatively unclear (I posted a thread discussing it right after the BA codex came out for exactly that reason).

I do note that since no order of operations is specified you could still move the transport first and make sure to put it into the line of march the rage unit is going to take, and then there is nothing in the rules preventing embarkation.

Jack