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.

Hi guys,

My friend and I are having a little argument about the usage of Allies and their various vehicles with carrying capacity. I know it's been FAQ'd for various races that allies can't use their transports, does this also extend to anything with a carrying capacity? (Such as, putting a Dark Angels Tech Marine w/ PFG in a Blood Angel's Land Raider and dropping it from a Blood Angel's drop ship)

I believe it extends to anything with a carrying capacity, though he is very adamant that it doesn't. Could we get some clarification on this?

Anything with a Carrying Capacity is a Transport...

Could you maybe give me a page number? I thought that, but I couldn't find it in the BRB.

There's no such thing as "Carrying Capacity".
There is "Transport Capacity" which is a characteristic of Transports p78.

rabidelfman wrote:
Could you maybe give me a page number? I thought that, but I couldn't find it in the BRB.

There isn't a rule saying that specifically, but page 410 (in the big BRB don't have my little one nearby) lists the Land Raider as a Transport.
Page 78 says that all transports have a carrying capacity. I'd be interested to find rules for carrying capacity that wasn't related to transports.

Page 78, just the section that mentions transport capacity.

You can have Skimmers that are transports, tanks flyers etc... if they can carry troops they are a transport.

Thank you! This settles it for us.

Was it ever clarified whether allied battle-brother characters can use transport if they're joined in a squad from the army the transport belongs to? (Ie. Archon joining a squad of guardians in a Wave Serpent.)

 Crimson wrote:
Was it ever clarified whether allied battle-brother characters can use transport if they're joined in a squad from the army the transport belongs to? (Ie. Archon joining a squad of guardians in a Wave Serpent.)

RAW you can (although some seem to disagree without citing actual rules) and Intent is unclear.
Discuss it with your opponent/TO.

rigeld2 wrote:

 Crimson wrote:
Was it ever clarified whether allied battle-brother characters can use transport if they're joined in a squad from the army the transport belongs to? (Ie. Archon joining a squad of guardians in a Wave Serpent.)

RAW you can (although some seem to disagree without citing actual rules) and Intent is unclear.
Discuss it with your opponent/TO.

Actually rules have been cited, but for some reason they were ignored.

Find the recent thread and decide for yourselves if you want IC's riding in battle brothers transports or not.

Sorry, I should've been more correct.
Rules relevant to the discussion weren't cited on one side - at least nothing that disproved the RAW side.

That is really not true, there were plenty of RAW reasons for allied IC's not embarking.

Bottom Line is: Find the recent thread and decide for yourselves if you want IC's riding in battle brothers transports or not.

rigeld2 wrote:
Sorry, I should've been more correct.
Rules relevant to the discussion weren't cited on one side - at least nothing that disproved the RAW side.

The fact that you disagree with the opposing argument doesn't make it irrelevant.

There are arguments both ways, but IMO the intent is fairly clear that allies are not intended to go into each others' transports, given that this is what the rules actually say.

Until it is FAQd, discuss it with your opponent before the game of either of you are using battle brothers and transports.

 insaniak wrote:
allies are not intended to go into each others' transports, given that this is what the rules actually say.

Citation required - no rule actually says that.

Page 112, "Battle Brothers' - third bullet point.

The basis for the disagreement is simply over whether or not an allied IC still counts as a Battle Brother when joined to an allied unit.

The Naysayers cite the IC rules, which state that a joined IC counts as a part of the unit for all rules purposes.

The Yaysayers point out that counting as a part of the same unit doesn't change the Codex that the model was selected from.

People will just have to make up their own minds until GW explains just what they actually intended... but as I said, the intention here seems clear to me.

 insaniak wrote:
Page 112, "Battle Brothers' - third bullet point.

Which doesn't say

insaniak wrote:allies [cannot] go into each others' transports

Not in those exact words, but it is what it means.

Well, no - it means Battle Brother units can't embark - other allies are forbidden beause you can't embark into an enemy transport.

So you're just arguing for the sake of it, then?

If the other two classes of allies are forbidden from embarking into allied transports, and the rule in the BB section states that '...not even Battle Brothers can embark in allied transports' then that does mean that allies can not embark into each others' transports.

It means allied units cannot.

rigeld2 wrote:
It means allied units cannot.

The BRB does not use the word units in that sentence. The exact sentence is, "However, note that not even Battle Brothers can embark in allied transports." I don't see how that could be interpreted as only meaning units. While I think the argument about weather or not he counts as a BB after he joins a unit has some good points (for raw, not for hiwpi), I don't think a good argument could be made for how that sentence could mean only units.

cryhavok wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:
It means allied units cannot.

The BRB does not use the word units in that sentence. The exact sentence is, "However, note that not even Battle Brothers can embark in allied transports." I don't see how that could be interpreted as only meaning units. While I think the argument about weather or not he counts as a BB after he joins a unit has some good points (for raw, not for hiwpi), I don't think a good argument could be made for how that sentence could mean only units.

No, but it does use unit to describe Battle Brothers right before the list. "Battle Brothers are treated as 'friendly units'...This means for example, that Battle Brothers:"

cryhavok wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:
It means allied units cannot.

The BRB does not use the word units in that sentence. The exact sentence is, "However, note that not even Battle Brothers can embark in allied transports." I don't see how that could be interpreted as only meaning units. While I think the argument about weather or not he counts as a BB after he joins a unit has some good points (for raw, not for hiwpi), I don't think a good argument could be made for how that sentence could mean only units.

As Happyjew pointed out if you read the entire section it shows how those rules only apply to units.

Then I should point out that the BRB uses the term "units" to mean both "squad" and "model" at different points, but honestly I don't feel like arguing about it so, whatever floats your (and your group's) boat works.

cryhavok wrote:
Then I should point out that the BRB uses the term "units" to mean both "squad" and "model" at different points, but honestly I don't feel like arguing about it so, whatever floats your (and your group's) boat works.

Citation?
That would break quite a few rules.

Honestly this has yet to come up in my group. Almost no one plays with allies, and the few who do don't take BB.

rigeld2 wrote:

cryhavok wrote:
Then I should point out that the BRB uses the term "units" to mean both "squad" and "model" at different points, but honestly I don't feel like arguing about it so, whatever floats your (and your group's) boat works.

Citation?
That would break quite a few rules.

The character section on page 63.

Rulebook wrote:Other characters, such as Mephiston of the Blood Angels, fight as units on their own.

Regardless, your interpretation is wrong. Nowhere is it stated that the rules for Battle Brother allies only apply to Battle Brother units, as you say. What it does say is that Battle Brothers are counted as friendly units - that's something else.

rigeld2 wrote:

cryhavok wrote:
Then I should point out that the BRB uses the term "units" to mean both "squad" and "model" at different points, but honestly I don't feel like arguing about it so, whatever floats your (and your group's) boat works.

Citation?
That would break quite a few rules.

You really have a hard time with the idea of, "I don't want to argue about this" don't you. I'll let you have this one, but I won't be getting in to the argument any further, so you'll have to make any arguments with someone else.

In numerous places the BRB refers to unit type as an extension of a model's characteristic profile. Because of this, through out the unit type chapter, they use the term unit to mean a model with this unit type. IE a jet pack unit can move as normal model's of their type or activate their jet packs (pg 47, brb, jetpack units, movement) There was a thread about this a while ago, it was conclusively proven that unit type was an individual model's trait and not based on anything at the squad level. I won't recreate the whole thread here for you, you'll have to go find it. This shows that the BRB uses unit to mean a model in some places and squad in others.

Now I could continue this into an argument about the battle brother's thing, but that is frankly uninteresting to me, so I am not going to get into it, and won't be responding to any further attempts to draw me into it.

That's not referring to a model as a unit - that's explaining that some units are single model characters.

And the rules define a Battle Brother as a friendly unit. If you're not a unit, you can't be a friendly unit, and therefore you can't be a Battle Brother.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

cryhavok wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:

cryhavok wrote:
Then I should point out that the BRB uses the term "units" to mean both "squad" and "model" at different points, but honestly I don't feel like arguing about it so, whatever floats your (and your group's) boat works.

Citation?
That would break quite a few rules.

You really have a hard time with the idea of, "I don't want to argue about this" don't you. I'll let you have this one, but I won't be getting in to the argument any further, so you'll have to make any arguments with someone else.

Yes, I have a problem with someone making an outlandish statement and then bouncing.

In numerous places the BRB refers to unit type as an extension of a model's characteristic profile. Because of this, through out the unit type chapter, they use the term unit to mean a model with this unit type. IE a jet pack unit can move as normal model's of their type or activate their jet packs (pg 47, brb, jetpack units, movement) There was a thread about this a while ago, it was conclusively proven that unit type was an individual model's trait and not based on anything at the squad level. I won't recreate the whole thread here for you, you'll have to go find it. This shows that the BRB uses unit to mean a model in some places and squad in others.

That's an incorrect conclusion. Yes, a unit type is a model based rule, but that does not mean that unit and model are interchangeable as you implies.

Now I could continue this into an argument about the battle brother's thing, but that is frankly uninteresting to me, so I am not going to get into it, and won't be responding to any further attempts to draw me into it.

No one is trying to draw you into it - you involved yourself.
Goodbye.

rigeld2 wrote:
That's not referring to a model as a unit - that's explaining that some units are single model characters.

And the rules define a Battle Brother as a friendly unit. If you're not a unit, you can't be a friendly unit, and therefore you can't be a Battle Brother.

The example is specifically a single character that is stated to be a unit. Ergo, single characters can be units. Ergo, it is shown, as cryhavok stated, that the rulebook does not preclude single models from being units.

As for the Battle Brother thing, they are specifically defining all Battle Brothers as friendly units. That means everything that is a Battle Brother, be it independent characters, vehicles or units, counts as a friendly unit.