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.

I couldn't find this posted about elsewhere, and I've failed for a while to find any rule that makes the issue completely clear to me. Does a unit inside a transport vehicle count as being in base contact with said vehicle? For a specific example, could a Techpriest Enginseer inside a Valkyrie use Blessings of the Omnissiah on the Valkyrie he's in? My gut says yes (from a logical standpoint), but I can't find any RaW that supports it.

Great thanks,
D!

Check the unit's listing. If it specifically says the unit may use its "repair" ability whilst inside a vehicle, it may. For example, in the Ork codex, the Mek's Tools entry says the Mek or Big Mek must be "inside (or in base contact with)" the vehicle. Unfortunately, I don't have my IG codex on me, so I can't check the Techpriest entry, but your answer should be there.

The techpriest's ability says it must be "in base contact", without further explanation. But it seems silly to me to believe that a priest standing inside a vehicle is not touching it. (Especially in the case of a Valk. Seems like reaching would be much easier from inside than from the ground)

On a Valkyrie, the base is used for assaulting and other "base contact" or "access point" purposes. So he could be in BtB with the Valk and repair it.

But if it doesn't specifically say he can do it without being inside the vehicle, I don't believe there's a general rule allowing it.

I could be wrong, let's get a second opinion (read: wait for Gwar! to read this thread).

IF you are inside the vehicle you arent in b2b.

Imagine trying to repair a defunct engine from inside the aircraft - how would that work exactly?

Orks are different, as usual - from memory Meks can repair while embarked.

nosferatu1001 wrote:IF you are inside the vehicle you arent in b2b.

Imagine trying to repair a defunct engine from inside the aircraft - how would that work exactly?

Orks are different, as usual - from memory Meks can repair while embarked.

+1

For the same reason that when assaulting a transport, embarked models do not count as invovled in the CC.

Course, GW has thrown a wrench into figuring this out one way or the other, with the SW FAQ, where it says:

Q. Can an Iron Priest attempt to use his
Battlesmith special rule to repair a vehicle he is
currently embarked upon?
A. Yes.

Checking the SW codex, page 38, it ays: "If an Iron Priest is in base contact.........." So in that instance at least, base contact includes being embarked on the vehicle. So why wouldn't it count for any others?

Because the SW codex and SW FAQ have no bearing whatsoever on any other codex?

Also because it doesn't say "Techmarine" or "Techpriest," it says "Iron Priest."

Is the unit called an Iron Priest or a Mek?

No?

Then you may not repair the transport if you're inside of it.

Also because the FAQs are not RAW, merely "Studio House Rules?"

Need I go on?

Or does it set a precedent on what they (GW) consider to be 'base contact' for purposes of repairing vehicles?

don_mondo wrote:Or does it set a precedent on what they (GW) consider to be 'base contact' for purposes of repairing vehicles?

It doesn't, because it doesn't say, "Embarked is the same thing as base-to-base contact."

It makes an exception for the Iron Priest, and the Iron Priest only, for repairing when inside of a transport.

Also, see the rest of my points, I think you may have posted before my edit.

don_mondo wrote:Or does it set a precedent on what they (GW) consider to be 'base contact' for purposes of repairing vehicles?

Now now... don't you go trying to explore options like precedent and like kind to come to your own conclusions. The holy writ must say explicitly in every instance what may occur, or it may not!

/sarcasm

In all seriousness, seems about right to me. If my opponent wanted to try and repair his Chimera with a Techpriest inside, I'd let him.

don_mondo wrote:Or does it set a precedent on what they (GW) consider to be 'base contact' for purposes of repairing vehicles?

While I would love to go down that path (especially with Shadows in the Warp), I think it causes more issues than it solves.

The Green Git wrote:Now now... don't you go trying to explore options like precedent and like kind to come to your own conclusions. The holy writ must say explicitly in every instance what may occur, or it may not!

Sarcasm aside, how is this not true?

Can we futz around with the codices and make changes because they "make sense" to us?

...did it ever occur to you that GW, for balance purposes, didn't want Techpriests or Techmarines to be able to repair a transport from inside of it?

No, because we are only allowed to assume what GW are thinking when it benefits us. </sarcasm>

In Any case, No, the Techpriest cannot repair a vehicle while embarked.

The Green Git wrote:In all seriousness, seems about right to me. If my opponent wanted to try and repair his Chimera with a Techpriest inside, I'd let him.

I think this is how most of us feel in friendly games. That does not, however, change what is written in the 'Dex.

SaintHazard wrote:

Also because the FAQs are not RAW, merely "Studio House Rules?"

For purposes of rules discussions here, they carry the weight of rules. From Tenets of YMDC:
2. The only official sources of information are the current rulebooks and the Games Workshop FAQs.

Anyways, IMO, it (the FAQ) provides enough of a question mark that I don't think we have a solid answer, unless GW ever gets off their ass and provides one.

SaintHazard wrote:
...did it ever occur to you that GW, for balance purposes, didn't want Techpriests or Techmarines to be able to repair a transport from inside of it?

Yeah, and it's also occurred to me the the moon is made of green cheese. But it's not likely.

Wow. Didn't mean to start a fight. Thanks for the responses, though, fellas.

In any case, it would seem the answer to the question is pretty clear. Regardless of what the RaI is, the RaW does not support embarked as counting for base-to-base. That was all I needed.

If it is, the most annoying unit for eldar/SoB/DE to play-
LR achilles with a techmarine inside.
5 turns of vicious shooting:
"ha! I have blown that annoying TFC off!"
"screw screw, bang bang, twist twist, presto! good as new"
" ing marine, ing fixing when ing embarked, can't even ing touch the ing guy in a ing indestructible piece of .
ing and then he s his ing into that ing . Oh my ing , what a load of . itty ."
*collapses*
"hey, are you okay?"
""

This post made my joints ache.

Locking for thread necromancy.