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.

RAW states that "any unit that disembarkes may assault..." Since they have already fulfilled the first condition (Disembarked) that should carry on to the second condition (Can assault).

If you have an apothecary and when you are rolling for FnP for him and the unit he is in, if he fails his FnP save, does the rest of the FnP saves count? They do because they have already started to happen.

If RAW was as such "Units can disembark as normal from this vehicle. Units can then assault as normal in the Assault phase" I would agree that the could not assault. However since the condition has already started then it is carried through.

Nemesor Dave wrote:#1 is an interesting take on this scenario. For arguments sake I'll have a shot at it.

Lets look at it the other way:

Units may move and assault unless otherwise restricted.

1) The unit disembarked from a vehicle that moved in the Movement phase so they cannot assault.
2) Its open topped or assault which removes that restriction. They can now assault.
3) The vehicle is destroyed, but nothing has put the restriction back in place that prevents them from assaulting.

If the ability to assault is an ability the unit has that is removed and replaced, then by exiting the vehicle that ability has been replaced. Simply destroying the vehicle does not put back that restriction that they cannot assault.

I edited #1, hope that was okay.

Your #2 does in fact remove that restriction, but that restriction is only removed in the Assault phase. Look at it this way.

Movement phase: Vehicle moves so the unit may not assault.
Shooting phase: Nothing happens to the vehicle
Assault phase: The vehicle has the assault vehicle special rule which allows the unit to assault. So the Terminators are free to assault.

Second Scenario;

Movement phase: Vehicle moves so the unit may not assault.
Shooting phase: The vehicle is destroyed.
Assault phase: The vehicle had the assault vehicle special rule which would have allowed the unit to assault. But the vehicle is gone and as such any special rule it had ceases to work. There is no assault vehicle rule that would allow the disembarked unit to assault. So the Terminators are not allowed to assault.

time wizard wrote:

Nemesor Dave wrote:#1 is an interesting take on this scenario. For arguments sake I'll have a shot at it.

Lets look at it the other way:

Units may move and assault unless otherwise restricted.

1) The unit disembarked from a vehicle that moved in the Movement phase so they cannot assault.
2) Its open topped or assault which removes that restriction. They can now assault.
3) The vehicle is destroyed, but nothing has put the restriction back in place that prevents them from assaulting.

If the ability to assault is an ability the unit has that is removed and replaced, then by exiting the vehicle that ability has been replaced. Simply destroying the vehicle does not put back that restriction that they cannot assault.

I edited #1, hope that was okay.

Your #2 does in fact remove that restriction, but that restriction is only removed in the Assault phase. Look at it this way.

Movement phase: Vehicle moves so the unit may not assault.
Shooting phase: Nothing happens to the vehicle
Assault phase: The vehicle has the assault vehicle special rule which allows the unit to assault. So the Terminators are free to assault.

Second Scenario;

Movement phase: Vehicle moves so the unit may not assault.
Shooting phase: The vehicle is destroyed.
Assault phase: The vehicle had the assault vehicle special rule which would have allowed the unit to assault. But the vehicle is gone and as such any special rule it had ceases to work. There is no assault vehicle rule that would allow the disembarked unit to assault. So the Terminators are not allowed to assault.

I don't believe the FAQ specifies phase, so your "Second Scenario" is irrelevant. The thing allowing the Terminators to assault after the vehicle moved was the Assault Ramp, which no longer exists. The special rule preventing them from assaulting was the rule about vehicle movement, with also no longer exists. Per the FAQ, it seems the terminators would still be eligible to assault.

(Except that the FAQ contradicts itself and says they may not assault.)

whitedragon wrote:I don't believe the FAQ specifies phase, so your "Second Scenario" is irrelevant. The thing allowing the Terminators to assault after the vehicle moved was the Assault Ramp, which no longer exists. The special rule preventing them from assaulting was the rule about vehicle movement, with also no longer exists. Per the FAQ, it seems the terminators would still be eligible to assault.

(Except that the FAQ contradicts itself and says they may not assault.)

There is no special rule preventing them from assaulting - it's a normal BRB rule. Therefore it's still enforced. Therefore they can't assault.

CT GAMER wrote:Both instances are pretty clear cut examples of common sense application.

Sure. Another example of common sense application is to accept that the game rules are an abstraction rather than a simulation, and sometimes that abstraction leads to situations where rules interactions don't quite match real world logic.

Models firing rapid fire weapons at max range don't actually fire just a single round. Nor do they fire exactly 2 rounds when firing at short range.
Plasma guns don't actually overheat and kill their bearer 1 out of every 6 shots.
Company Standards don't actually inflict wounds on enemy models just by waving about.
Skimmers don't actually move in specific timed bursts of movement, finishing each the exact same height above the ground.
Battleships don't actually sail around London buying real estate. Although that might be a different game...

All of these are abstractions that we accept for the sake of playing a turn-based game with static models.

CT GAMER wrote:Soa unit exited a vehicle using it's assault ramp, but then later the vehicle gets destroyed so they never ran down the ramp or exited the vehicle?

No, they exited the vehicle. But the rule that would have let them assault after doing that is no longer in play.

It's not really as complicated as you're trying to make it.

whitedragon wrote:
I don't believe the FAQ specifies phase, so your "Second Scenario" is irrelevant. The thing allowing the Terminators to assault after the vehicle moved was the Assault Ramp, which no longer exists. The special rule preventing them from assaulting was the rule about vehicle movement, with also no longer exists. Per the FAQ, it seems the terminators would still be eligible to assault.
(Except that the FAQ contradicts itself and says they may not assault.)

Just out of curiosity, in what Codex does the LR have special rule "Assault Ramp"? Neither C:SM, C:SW,C:BA nor C:GK mentions such rule. In all those codices the rule is called "Assault Vehicle".
Second, you're just plaing wrong saying that the rule that is preventing them from assaulting is a "special" rule. It's not a special rule at all. For example, normal LR has two special rules: PoTMS and Assault Vehicle.

And FAQ doesn't need to specify "in previous phase", it was just used to make the example easier to parse.

whitedragon wrote:I don't believe the FAQ specifies phase, so your "Second Scenario" is irrelevant. The thing allowing the Terminators to assault after the vehicle moved was the Assault Ramp, which no longer exists. The special rule preventing them from assaulting was the rule about vehicle movement, with also no longer exists. Per the FAQ, it seems the terminators would still be eligible to assault.

(Except that the FAQ contradicts itself and says they may not assault.)

You're quite correct that the FAQ doesn't specify phase. It doesn't specify 'turn' either. What it says is that if the vehicle with the special rule is destroyed, then the special rules no longer applies.

I merely broke it down into the 3 phases that constitute the turn.

My point was that they were prevented from assaulting by the rule that says you can't assault from a vehicle that moved.
The special rule that allows them to do so it the Assault Vehicle rule, granted them by the land raider.
The FAQ clarifies that when the land raider is gone, so is that special rule.
That's all.

Let us see:

Scenario 1:
Movement Phase: LR moves --> Termi disembark
Shooting Phase: LR shoots
Assault Phase: Termi assaults
Everyone agrees with Scenario 1

Scenario 2:
Movement Phase: LR moves --> Termi stays inside
Shooting Phase: Friendly vindicators shoots and scatters into LR --> LR explodes --> Termi falls out
Assault Phase: Termi cannot assaults based on FAQ
Everyone agrees with Scenario 2

Scenario 3:
Movement Phase: LR moves --> Termi disembark
Shooting Phase: Friendly vindicators shoots and scatters into LR --> LR explodes ** Note that the termi are already outside
Assault Phase: Can the terminators assault?

I'm fairly certain Scenario 3 can happen and may have happened, and is probably what all the argument is all about.

The FAQ answered it.

And what have we all learned?

Don't shoot your own vehicles.

puma713 wrote:And what have we all learned?

Don't shoot your own vehicles.

Pretty much.... I wonder if the following is legal or possible, rule wise.

An LR roles up to a group of Lychguard w/ their shield thing and unload a unit of terminators. The LR shoots its MM at the lychguard, it bounced back on the LR, destroying it. The terminators are now stuck in the open and cannot assault.

Thoughts?

As per the FAQ, which has a simple unambiguous single word answer of "YES", then they cannot assault.

A general rule, which isnt a special rule of the vehicle, disallows them from assaulting - when blown up, this restriction still applies, as per the FAQ

A special rule would have allowed them to assault but, per the entirely unambiguous FAQ is LOST as soon as the vehicle was wrecked. They no longer have permission to assault. Therefore they cannot assault.

It's really THAT SIMPLE.

Avoid doing things to destroy your vehicle if you plan to assault? Not hard...

It is like when people move flat out right into dangerous terrain and crash and cry when everyone dies... well, don't risk blowing yourself up and you won't have an issue!

It is not like it is common to be in a situation where this would come up and if it does, you only did it to yourself so take your punishment.

Silly question then. How is this any different from an open topped vehicle blowing up after the troops disembarked? The open topped special rule would no longer apply and the squad wouldn't be able to assault?

From the RAW being quoted in various places on this thread I think the difference is that "open topped" is a vehicle type, rather than a special rule.

Flinty wrote:From the RAW being quoted in various places on this thread I think the difference is that "open topped" is a vehicle type, rather than a special rule.

This.

Open topped, while allowing similar actions, is not comparable to Assault Vehicle.

rigeld2 wrote:Open topped, while allowing similar actions, is not comparable to Assault Vehicle.

But it's still gone if you managed to blow it up, isn't it?

Irrelevant. Reread the FAQ, notice it only talks about *special rules* or *upgrades*, and realise that that doesnt include *unit type*

Yea, I would say what is the vehicle type of a DE skimmer or Trukk versus what is the vehicle type of a Land Raider?

Brother Ramses wrote:Yea, I would say what is the vehicle type of a DE skimmer or Trukk versus what is the vehicle type of a Land Raider?

Open topped skimmer or open top vehicle vs tank

optimusprime14 wrote:

Brother Ramses wrote:Yea, I would say what is the vehicle type of a DE skimmer or Trukk versus what is the vehicle type of a Land Raider?

Open topped skimmer or open top vehicle vs tank

And that is what allows assaults after destroyed from a skimmer and not from a tank that has assault ramps. Pretty straightforward.

I thought destroyed vehicles were Type Wreck or Crater. But seriously, no matter for me - it's not really coming up that often. ;-)

insaniak wrote:

CT GAMER wrote:Both instances are pretty clear cut examples of common sense application.

Sure. Another example of common sense application is to accept that the game rules are an abstraction rather than a simulation, and sometimes that abstraction leads to situations where rules interactions don't quite match real world logic.

Models firing rapid fire weapons at max range don't actually fire just a single round. Nor do they fire exactly 2 rounds when firing at short range.
Plasma guns don't actually overheat and kill their bearer 1 out of every 6 shots.
Company Standards don't actually inflict wounds on enemy models just by waving about.
Skimmers don't actually move in specific timed bursts of movement, finishing each the exact same height above the ground.
Battleships don't actually sail around London buying real estate. Although that might be a different game...

All of these are abstractions that we accept for the sake of playing a turn-based game with static models.

CT GAMER wrote:Soa unit exited a vehicle using it's assault ramp, but then later the vehicle gets destroyed so they never ran down the ramp or exited the vehicle?

No, they exited the vehicle. But the rule that would have let them assault after doing that is no longer in play.

It's not really as complicated as you're trying to make it.

I've got to agree, the rule is referring to a land raider that blows up, its passengers survive and then they try to assault. In which case no, you cannot assault. However, once you disembark you disembark, youve moved out of the LR and thus benefit from the assault ramp. I can't imagine this ever even coming up in a game wow

IMHO I think it's like whenever you've been watching a tv show or movie and a dying character gives over their power or blessing even though they're "gone" the blessing remains.

So, again - imho - I think they get the assault benefit

Logic supports you Gharron FAQ do not. :(

I think it is a bad call for the FAQ.

Nemesor Dave and Luide both gave great replies to help frame it to make sense. While the "Assault Vehicle" special rule is meant to indicate specialized tactics or equipment that the Land Raider employs, the fact that there is a catastrophic explosion not six inches from their fannies provides ample excuse for the terminators to be a little distracted and not be able to complete their charge.

I took it to mean it is a vehicle that is easy to get out of quickly and in combat formation, kinda like the difference between a Blackhawk and Chinook Helicopter, once your out and ready to rock and roll what ever happens to your ride ain't gunna change that.

Mind you having it explode nearby is a good point, but doesn't really follow if they get out, then move away then the taxi blows up.

Magpie wrote:
I think it is a bad call for the FAQ.

Agreed. I still think it was only meant to apply to embarked units, by way of the example they gave. Chances are GW did not even consider this exact circumstance being discussed here. It's not something that should come up too often.

I'll agree that, as written and FAQ'd, the unit cannot assault.
I'd also report it as a bug if this was software.

the only question here is whether or not the normal restriction of being unable to assault after disembarking get lifted in the movement phase (ie when they disembark) or when they are going to assault, if its the former then they would get to assault unless they fire a RF weapon (they count as having moved so therefore cannot fire heavy weapons, unless relentless, which allows them to assault after firing heavy or RF weapons) however, it its the later which is what the majority of people are saying then of course you wouldn't

getting out after your vehicle has moved gives you the 'time' to ready yourself for the assualt, open topped and assault vehicles give you that opportunity (other vehicles just assume that its much harder to get out of), whereas getting out of a vehicle which has just wrecked or exploded, you have to regain your 'composure' (pinning check) and sometimes don't (failing pinning) so that eats up the 'time', and also it would be happening while you are firing at the squad you which to assault (which in theory would happen while you're charging but as moving models an inch roll dice move an inch roll etc is troublesome its easier to separate it into different phases, models that run forfeit their shooting and assault because they are moving faster than normal and can't see (models with fleet are good at running and can keep their eyes on their opponent while moving that fast and therefore can assault after running)

as for the case of it being a 'distraction' in a battle there is going to be a lot of explosions, being distracted by something like that is not fitting of a unit which is fearless (even though its only termies in example), why should anyone else care about their tank exploding, if fact if the tank behind me was shot at and exploded I would want to charge into whatever killed it and take revenge, killing all in my path

RAW I would probably say no due to faq, although I could go either way

RAI I say yes, as I believe the restriction should be lifted when it gets applied....ie I normal can't do this later but because I JUST did this I can

It doesnt get "lifted" until they try to assault, because that is whaen the rules for Assault Ramp are used.

Bloodclaw - no, wrong. Reread the FAQ. Note the words "For example", after the unambiguous YES answer. The EXAMPLE included an embarked unit, but that doesnt alter one jot the answer of YES, the assault ramp rule is lost.