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 lone independent character start in a dedicated transport, without accompanying a squad. This was just a rules question that appeared out of nowhere in my head. I can't see why I'd want to do it, but it is an interesting issue to try and figure out.

P67.- "The only limitation of a dedicated transport is that when it is deployed it can only carry the unit it was selected with (plus any independent characters)..."

The "plus any independent characters" is unclear if it means attached independent characters, or if it is listing it as an additional option, for example "I like blue clothes (plus any with polka-dots)." If the rule said "...can only carry the unit it was selected with (plus any dreadnoughts)," would you then argue that it can't actually carry the dreadnought since it is not purchased with the transport?

To further illustrate my point, read the transport rules on p. 66, it doesn't even say that IC's have to join the unit in the transport, it just says "A transport may carry a single infantry unit and/or any number of independent characters..." A unit and any number if IC's, it doesn't say a unit with IC's attached, not that it has any bearing on the main question asked, it just shows that IC's tend to follow different rules entirely for transports.

I posted this on Warseer and got the usual "if you don't agree with me you're wrong" arguments, so I thought I'd try it here for a change.

Thanks!

The IC is not the unit it was bought for. The Parenthesis is there simply to say that, if you attach ICs to the unit that bought it, they can still embark in the DR

Thank you for the response nosferatu1001, I dont' want to sound like I'm splitting hairs but I'm afraid I have to disagree, the parentheses only say "(plus any independent characters)," it doesn't make any mention of attached or otherwise.

It includes that restriction by including the ICs in parenthesis rather than as a separate statement.

You can embark the unit plus any ICs. Not ICs by themselves.

insaniak wrote:It includes that restriction by including the ICs in parenthesis rather than as a separate statement.

You can embark the unit plus any ICs. Not ICs by themselves.

Yeah, someone just finally pointed that out on warseer, the parentheses turn the statement into a subsidiary clause, so it can only be valid if the other clause is valid, yaddah yaddah...

Thanks guys, especially for being more civil, I think I'll be posting my rules questions here first now...

But to start in the DT, you have to have a unit in there, otherwise you can not add the IC.

it can only carry the unit it was selected with (plus any independent characters).

That is why they say "(plus any independent characters)".

You can not add an IC to a squad if they are not in the same transport.

the "(plus any independent characters)" is saying the squad needs to be there to attach an IC to.

minionboy wrote:
I posted this on Warseer and got the usual "if you don't agree with me you're wrong" arguments, so I thought I'd try it here for a change.

Thanks!

No, we actually said pretty much the same thing you've been told here. Deal with it.

don_mondo wrote:

minionboy wrote:
I posted this on Warseer and got the usual "if you don't agree with me you're wrong" arguments, so I thought I'd try it here for a change.

Thanks!

No, we actually said pretty much the same thing you've been told here. Deal with it.

Actually, here they gave me an answer without being rude, on Warseer I'm sorry to say, the responses were negative and condescending before someone put together a thoughtful and accurate response.

Also, there is no sense in telling me to "Deal with it"." I'm not complaining about the ruling, I was just looking for the answer on why that perspective is correct, instead your response was literally "Well, if you want to say that this isn't clear, then nothing we can say will help you." Telling me to "Deal with it" only further illustrates my point on why I avoided Warseer after your response and posted it here.

What about the reverse of this scenario?

can a lord commissar start in his dedicated transport? also can a unit attach to him and start inside the chimera?

RAW I'd have to say no, but he could go in there with any other IC's you wanted.

insaniak wrote:It includes that restriction by including the ICs in parenthesis rather than as a separate statement.

You can embark the unit plus any ICs. Not ICs by themselves.

Just to clarify something which is a bit off the OP's question:

A lone IC can still get into a transport, but later in the game, yes?

This'll come up a lot for me, so I'd like to walk this around a bit. I frequently use haems and wyches starting in the girls' raider. Often, everyone gets out, heading separate directions for destruction and fun. Let's say my wyches are still busy, but after using the Shattershard my haem decides it's time to head for a transport.

It is okay for him to hop into an empty raider or venom somewhere in Turn 3?

The commissar can start in his own transport, yes, of course. He is the unit to which the transport belongs.

Any IC joined to him could also start in his transport. A squad that he is joined to could not... it's his transport, and they're not ICs.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Brothererekose wrote:A lone IC can still get into a transport, but later in the game, yes?

Yes, so long as he is infantry, he can board transports just the same as any other infantry unit.

don_mondo wrote:

minionboy wrote:
I posted this on Warseer and got the usual "if you don't agree with me you're wrong" arguments, so I thought I'd try it here for a change.

Thanks!

No, we actually said pretty much the same thing you've been told here. Deal with it.

So.... you chased his other post down here to prove to him you could be rude on two forums?!

Lobukia wrote:

don_mondo wrote:

minionboy wrote:
I posted this on Warseer and got the usual "if you don't agree with me you're wrong" arguments, so I thought I'd try it here for a change.

Thanks!

No, we actually said pretty much the same thing you've been told here. Deal with it.

So.... you chased his other post down here to prove to him you could be rude on two forums?!

That's what I call dedication. LMFAO

sub-zero wrote:

Lobukia wrote:

don_mondo wrote:

minionboy wrote:
I posted this on Warseer and got the usual "if you don't agree with me you're wrong" arguments, so I thought I'd try it here for a change.

Thanks!

No, we actually said pretty much the same thing you've been told here. Deal with it.

So.... you chased his other post down here to prove to him you could be rude on two forums?!

That's what I call dedication. LMFAO

I would now encourage everyone in this thread to click on the little Triangle of Friendship on don_mondo's post.

Enjoy your weekends!

I think we're done here.