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.

It looks to me like the RAW says that you cannot mix PA and TDA models in a BT Land Raider. (It says for the Crusader "up to 15 Marines in PA, or 8 Terminators").

So can you not have a PA model joined to Terminators in the same Land Raider? By that logic, can a Chaplain in PA, who is part of a Terminator Command Squad not be given a Land Raider (or ride in it, rather)?

By super-RAW, can TDA models not enter a Land Raider because they are not "Terminators"?

Where should I draw the line in this instance? We already house-rule Assault Vehicle on my Land Raiders (one of our extremely few house rules).

Thoughts?

Xca|iber wrote:It looks to me like the RAW says that you cannot mix PA and TDA models in a BT Land Raider. (It says for the Crusader "up to 15 Marines in PA, or 8 Terminators").

So can you not have a PA model joined to Terminators in the same Land Raider? By that logic, can a Chaplain in PA, who is part of a Terminator Command Squad not be given a Land Raider (or ride in it, rather)?

By super-RAW, can TDA models not enter a Land Raider because they are not "Terminators"?

Where should I draw the line in this instance? We already house-rule Assault Vehicle on my Land Raiders (one of our extremely few house rules).

Thoughts?

You are correct. RaW BT LRC are very picky as to who they let in and disallow mixed occupants.

I would say to stick to the RaW, since it is clear and has always been this way (that is, 5th didn't change how it worked like the Assault Ramps rule).

From a pure RAW reading, the arbitrary restrictions are accurate.

However- most places (read: every major tournament I've ever been to or read about) allows for mixed transport, with Terminators counting as 2 models for transport purposes. Barring this, you'd be unable to transport Neophytes at all, as they are neither PA nor TDA, and your Emperor's Champion would similarly be unable to ride.

@Gwar!: no need for a rant-y response about RAW- just letting OP know how it is played by the vast majority of the 40k world.

so, when did terminators become tactical dreadnought armoured marines? really? are we actually trying to pick this apart?


Automatically Appended Next Post:
and if you guys are trying this hard, remember that you couldn't carry a techmarine or most commanders, either, as they are not in power armour, rather they are in artificer armour...

so really, what is the call that we are making here?

Tactical Dreadnought Armour and Terminator Armour are interchangeable terms. TDA is just an easier acronym.

Xca|iber wrote:It looks to me like the RAW says that you cannot mix PA and TDA models in a BT Land Raider. (It says for the Crusader "up to 15 Marines in PA, or 8 Terminators").

Once upon a time, all of the Marine codexes were worded similarly. The standard question last edition was whether C:SM Scouts could ride in transport vehicles, as they were in neither PA or TDA. Or whether anything other than Grey Knights could ride in GK Land Raiders.

It's loose wording, nothing more. Regardless of RAW, you'll find that pretty much everyone takes it as a guide to the number of models allowed, rather than a strict limitation on what they have to be wearing in order to be allowed in.


On a slightly off-topic note:

By that logic, can a Chaplain in PA, who is part of a Terminator Command Squad not be given a Land Raider (or ride in it, rather)?

...for what it's worth, a Chaplain in PA can't have a Terminator-armoured command squad. See the first paragraph of the command squad's army list entry.

Actually, the GK LR issue is cut and dry too. Only Grey Knights can ride in them, nothing else.

It also makes sense from a fluff standpoint (not that it matters, but meh).

insaniak wrote:
On a slightly off-topic note:

By that logic, can a Chaplain in PA, who is part of a Terminator Command Squad not be given a Land Raider (or ride in it, rather)?

...for what it's worth, a Chaplain in PA can't have a Terminator-armoured command squad. See the first paragraph of the command squad's army list entry.

They can. There's a slight difference in wording in the Command Squad entries, which relates to the Character rules on p22 of the BT codex. It first says that BT Characters may operate as IC's defined in the BRB. It then says Commanders/Chaplains may lead a command squad, making them part of the unit, and therefore unable to leave (but still able to be picked out in CC). Finally, it states that chaplains may further be attached to a commander/other chaplain's command squad, similarly becoming part of the unit and unable to leave. (This is one of the oft overlooked elements of the BT codex).

Under the command squad entries, the normal Command Squad entry states that TDA Characters may not lead or be attached to the unit, but may join during play - ergo, they may only be part of the squad if they follow the normal IC rules (option 1 under the Character rules on p22).

The Terminator command squad, on the other hand, states only that they may not have TDA characters attached to them. It specifically does not deny a PA character from leading the command squad, and so option 2 on p22 takes effect, granting the character permission to lead the Terminator Command Squad.

As for my original question, since there do seem to be some oddities with who can ride in the LR/LRC, I would agree that the restriction is somewhat loose (heralding as it does from basically 3rd edition - though the codex was written in 4th). I'll probably just ask my opponents if they're okay with it as far as mixing normal/TDA marines. However, I think I can safely assume that nobody is going to bug me about having neophytes, characters w/ TDA/artificer armour, or whatever in my transports. (Unfortunately, I am still bound by that damn 15 PA limit instead of the newer 16).

SoloFalcon1138 wrote:so, when did terminators become tactical dreadnought armoured marines? really? are we actually trying to pick this apart?

they've always been from the time they were introduced. the rules intro'ing terminators IIRC were in the compendium (see pic below) and the title of the article is "TERMINATOR - space marine tactical dreadnought armor in warhammer 40,000".

@ warboss:

I used to have that compendium

warboss wrote:

SoloFalcon1138 wrote:so, when did terminators become tactical dreadnought armoured marines? really? are we actually trying to pick this apart?

they've always been from the time they were introduced. the rules intro'ing terminators IIRC were in the compendium (see pic below) and the title of the article is "TERMINATOR - space marine tactical dreadnought armor in warhammer 40,000".

I know that terminator armour is technically tactical dreadnought armour, I;m just wondering when the parlance was being used to prevent terminators from riding in Land Raiders...

Sorry, I was unclear. When I said TDA models I meant TDA characters, which are not "Terminators."

Ak!
RESIST!!


Models in TDA are terminators. . . .

Of course they are. I was simply clarifying my original question, which pertained to RAW.

kirsanth wrote:Models in TDA are terminators. . . .

Except when they are characters?

Homer

Homer S wrote:

kirsanth wrote:Models in TDA are terminators. . . .

Except when they are characters?

No