Ghost Ark Repair Barge rule

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.

**Praxiss**

Oh definately, that's why i said sometimes. If it's a big game and i need to fill some points i'll use it.

**nosferatu1001**

WarlordRob117 wrote:

I have helped judge multiple tournaments here in the states and I can tell this, had this come up, and found out that you had been playing this way the entire tournament? I dont care if you went undefeated, you would be disqualified on the spot.

your curiosity is better served elsewhere...

Then youre a bad judge / TO. T his isnt cheating, this is a perfectly 100% accurate reading of the rules. If you thought it was an issue, you should have included it in your FAQ, or made a ruling that goes forwards from that game on. Ex post facto rulings are a really, really bad idea

**Leth**

Especially when they in no way violate the rules.

**WarlordRob117**

Thats your opinion Nos... I have already emailed this issue to our gaming community where I live to see to it that silly interpretations like this dont make it to tables... the rule can be read either way and I will not have our head judges arguing with players over who is right and wrong... until a faq is released otherwise.

This is not a 100% accurate reading of the rules as it has already been implied that we do not know what "models" means... you've tried this before with me regarding chaos stuff so Im not going to waste my time explaining why...

and further more a faq hasnt been necessary till now as everyone is playing it that only warriors can be rezed by the barge. You show me where this has popped up before since the new codex has been released November 2011... because we have not run into this issue yet with players playing this way at our tourny... its mostly flier spam

Automatically Appended Next Post:

Leth wrote:
Especially when they in no way violate the rules.

So a dedicated transport for a unit of warriors , that can bring back D3 warrior models can rez crypteks/lords... tell me how thats accurate

**Kevin949**

WarlordRob117 wrote:
I wasnt hiding behind ambiguity I stated my opinion about a particular group of people... hiding behind ambiguity would be adding things like "unlike some people"... stop being so soft (this is directed towards Eyjio)...

"So, you *know* what their intent was? Maybe the exclusion of the specific model types allowed WAS intended. They have FAQ'd the codex a few times now and never changed it.
No no, you don't *know* what the intent was."

niether do you, or anyone on YMDC for that matter... if a rule has a loophole that can easily be exploited by more than one party, you know what to do? ban the unit from play or dont use the codex... simple fix... fair for everyone because it obvious that you and I have two seperate opinons based on intent (as you cannot argue with solid evidence that it was GW's intent to allow any particular model to be returned to play) that cannot be settled until a FAQ directly address' the issue...

I used Imotekhs lightning as an example as several others have done on this thread... you are going to tell me what I can and cannot respond to now? sic a DCM on me if you wish but Im well within my rights to answer or not answer someones question...

following your logic they should do that with every codex entry but they dont, because implication is used to alleviate excess writing and page use. Paraphrase, abreviate, foot note... these are all things used in codices to speed the writing process... it could also be said that someone forgot? or missed it? gasp! Imperfection is a human trait?

See, the difference between your statements and mine is that I haven't stated I know the intention. I've followed the written rule and used comparable rules from the same codex as a barometer to measure this one by.

**WarlordRob117**

yes you have... the rule can be read either way... this makes it a discussion of intent rather than whats actually written... you think it says this, I think its says that... all you did was compare another models abilities with another... thats it... it does not prove or disprove anything...

**Kevin949**

WarlordRob117 wrote:

Automatically Appended Next Post:

Leth wrote:
Especially when they in no way violate the rules.

So a dedicated transport for a unit of warriors , that can bring back D3 warrior models can rez crypteks/lords... tell me how thats accurate

They're upgrade characters.

The same way that a sergeant is not the same as the rest of his squad but is still a part of the squad.

**Happyjew**

Warlordrob, where in the rule does it say d3 warrior models?

Instead of asking leth how he is accurate, please explain how that part of your post is "accurate".

I'd quote the actual part of your post, but am having phone issues.

**WarlordRob117**

but they are not warriors... a Ghost Ark is a DT for warriors and warriors alone... not crypteks, not lords, not wraiths, not monoliths, not anything but warriors

**Kevin949**

WarlordRob117 wrote:
yes you have... the rule can be read either way... this makes it a discussion of intent rather than whats actually written... you think it says this, I think its says that... all you did was compare another models abilities with another... thats it... it does not prove or disprove anything...

Well, no, I know what it says. You want it to mean something else. Let me ask you this, if a lord/cryptek leading a warrior squad was within 3" of an objective but no other model was, would you be counted as scoring the objective?

Automatically Appended Next Post:

WarlordRob117 wrote:
but they are not warriors... a Ghost Ark is a DT for warriors and warriors alone... not crypteks, not lords, not wraiths, not monoliths, not anything but warriors

So then if I put a cryptek in a warrior unit I can't buy a ghost ark for them?

**WarlordRob117**

next your're going to tell me that a night scythe can bring any unit in reserve through it portal, not just the unit it is dedicated to

**Kevin949**

WarlordRob117 wrote:
next your're going to tell me that a night scythe can bring any unit in reserve through it portal, not just the unit it is dedicated to

If the NS picks up the unit, it can. But obviously it can only start with the unit it was bought for in it.

**WarlordRob117**

you place the cryptek with the unit during deployment, not when you are buying the Ghost ark to accompany the warriors

Automatically Appended Next Post:
obviously you are going off of memory and are implying intent

Automatically Appended Next Post:
as we have also determined on previous threads that the models are not actually inside the craft...

**Praxiss**

But the Ghost Ark can repair units within 6" of itself (i think, i'm unsure of the exact distance).

So the question of what units the Ark can carry has no bearing in this discussion.

**Kevin949**

WarlordRob117 wrote:
you place the cryptek with the unit during deployment, not when you are buying the Ghost ark to accompany the warriors

Automatically Appended Next Post:
obviously you are going off of memory and are implying intent

Automatically Appended Next Post:
as we have also determined on previous threads that the models are not actually inside the craft...

It's "before the battle", which is before deployment.

Sorry, what are you going on about with those next two statements?

Automatically Appended Next Post:

Praxiss wrote:
But the Ghost Ark can repair units within 6" of itself (i think, i'm unsure of the exact distance).

So the question of what units the Ark can carry has no bearing in this discussion.

Even though it can carry Warriors, lords, crypteks, overlords, and special characters.

But yes, 6" as well as embarked.

**WarlordRob117**

Praxiss wrote:
But the Ghost Ark can repair units within 6" of itself (i think, i'm unsure of the exact distance).

So the question of what units the Ark can carry has no bearing in this discussion.

oh but it does... it even says in its rules (I do believe you are right about the 6" thing) nominate a unit of "warriors", not a unit of "warriors (cryptek/lord included)", roll a D3 and replace that many models...

Automatically Appended Next Post:

**nosferatu1001**

Then I suggest you read the rules on upgrade characters, which is that they follow the unit rules. A unit of Warriors with a lord attached is still a unit of warriors.

It is an accurate reading of the rule, you just disagree despite having no rules basis for doing so. A number of tournaments around the UK have had players playing this way, and it is allowed in the rules.

Oh, and the models ARE inside the craft, as per the embarked rules. You may hjave made up rules otherwise, but theyve not been "decided" in other threads, not by a long shot.

Oh and "obviously" isnt intent - its in the rules for dedicated transports. You have read them, right?

**Kevin949**

WarlordRob117 wrote:
Praxiss wrote:
But the Ghost Ark can repair units within 6" of itself (i think, i'm unsure of the exact distance).

So the question of what units the Ark can carry has no bearing in this discussion.

oh but it does... it even says in its rules (I do believe you are right about the 6" thing) nominate a unit of "warriors", not a unit of "warriors (cryptek/lord included)", roll a D3 and replace that many models...

Automatically Appended Next Post:

If the NS picks up the unit, it can. But obviously it can only start with the unit it was bought for in it.

when you made the statement "but obviously" you are implying intent...

and I was refering to another thread where the general consensus was that the unit dedicated to the night scythe was not actually inside the night scythe but in reserve (hence why they come on the table from reserves should the NS be destroyed

I said "but obviously" because that is how dedicated transports work. I'm not implying intent at all there, it's literally how the rules work for them.

**WarlordRob117**

nosferatu1001 wrote:
Then I suggest you read the rules on upgrade characters, which is that they follow the unit rules. A unit of Warriors with a lord attached is still a unit of warriors.

It is an accurate reading of the rule, you just disagree despite having no rules basis for doing so. A number of tournaments around the UK have had players playing this way, and it is allowed in the rules.

Oh, and the models ARE inside the craft, as per the embarked rules. You may hjave made up rules otherwise, but theyve not been "decided" in other threads, not by a long shot.

Oh and "obviously" isnt intent - its in the rules for dedicated transports. You have read them, right?

I have several times... it is not just a unit of warriors... it is a unit of warriors with lord/cryptek attached... would you just write unit of warriors in your list with the lord/cryptek points added in? this would imply cheating as you have not identified the addition to the unit

^this is my rule basis right here... tournies playing like that in the UK is UK... Im from America bub, there may be some cultural differences lol

uh no they arent... if that were the case than any old unit could just walk in on the table edge instead of appearing amongst the wreckage

Obviously is a word in the english language which means "easy to see or detect" its also a word associated with imply, which means "to strongly suggest the truth or existence of"
and yes I have read them a couple of times actually... thank you for reminding me that I've been playing for a little while now... it shows you care

and it doesnt say the unit has to start inside of the transport, it just says no other units can start the game inside of it... not so obvious is it?

**grendel083**

So a unit of "Ork Boys" with shooters is no longer a unit of Ork Boys, but "Ork Boys with Shooters"
Upgrade characters are "effectively just another trooper in the unit" (page 63), they don't change what the unit is.

**WarlordRob117**

grendel083 wrote:
So a unit of "Ork Boys" with shooters is no longer a unit of Ork Boys, but "Ork Boys with Shooters"
Upgrade characters are "effectively just another trooper in the unit" (page 63), they don't change what the unit is.

you'd be putting down on your list that they are ork boyz with shooters right? Ork boys implies pistol/close combat weapon... a better arguement to make would be adding a nob or upgrading a unit of commandos with snikrot

**Kevin949**

WarlordRob117 wrote:
nosferatu1001 wrote:
Then I suggest you read the rules on upgrade characters, which is that they follow the unit rules. A unit of Warriors with a lord attached is still a unit of warriors.

It is an accurate reading of the rule, you just disagree despite having no rules basis for doing so. A number of tournaments around the UK have had players playing this way, and it is allowed in the rules.

Oh, and the models ARE inside the craft, as per the embarked rules. You may hjave made up rules otherwise, but theyve not been "decided" in other threads, not by a long shot.

Oh and "obviously" isnt intent - its in the rules for dedicated transports. You have read them, right?

I have several times... it is not just a unit of warriors... it is a unit of warriors with lord/cryptek attached... would you just write unit of warriors in your list with the lord/cryptek points added in? this would imply cheating as you have not identified the addition to the unit

^this is my rule basis right here... tournies playing like that in the UK is UK... Im from America bub, there may be some cultural differences lol

uh no they arent... if that were the case than any old unit could just walk in on the table edge instead of appearing amongst the wreckage

Obviously is a word in the english language which means "easy to see or detect" its also a word associated with imply, which means "to strongly suggest the truth or existence of"
and yes I have read them a couple of times actually... thank you for reminding me that I've been playing for a little while now... it shows you care

and it doesnt say the unit has to start inside of the transport, it just says no other units can start the game inside of it... not so obvious is it?

Sorry, my statement about the NS earlier was a little confusing now that I re-read what I said.

**WarlordRob117**

its cool dude

**grendel083**

WarlordRob117 wrote:
grendel083 wrote:
So a unit of "Ork Boys" with shooters is no longer a unit of Ork Boys, but "Ork Boys with Shooters"
Upgrade characters are "effectively just another trooper in the unit" (page 63), they don't change what the unit is.

you'd be putting down on your list that they are ork boyz with shooters right? Ork boys implies pistol/close combat weapon... a better arguement to make would be adding a nob or upgrading a unit of commandos with snikrot

Fair enough.
A unit of Ork Boys is still a unit of Ork Boys even with a Nob Upgrade.
Both the Nob and Necron Lord are Upgrade Characters. They don't change what the unit is, they are still a unit of Ork Boys.
And writing a list I would indeed list it as a unit of Ork Boys, followed by all upgrades (which would include the Nob).

**40k-noob**

It think it is a misstatement to call a cryptek an "upgrade" to a Warriors unit.

You cannot buy or select a cryptek in the Warriors army list entry.

Cryptek are not purchased for any unit but the Royal Court, that they can be assigned to a warrior unit does not make them an "Upgrade" to that unit.

Anyway aside from that, i do agree that the "Repair Barge" can repair characters assigned to the warriors unit as they are members of that unit.

**rigeld2**

WarlordRob117 wrote:
you place the cryptek with the unit during deployment, not when you are buying the Ghost ark to accompany the warriors

You do realize that the Ark specifically carries Warriors, Crypteks, Lords, Overlords, Immortals, and special characters - not just warriors right?
Also - are you trying to say that the Ghost Ark can only repair the unit it was bought for?

Please, show me the rule that differentiates between a unit and a unit with a character (independent or not) attached.
A Warrior unit with a Cryptek attached is still a Warrior unit.

as we have also determined on previous threads that the models are not actually inside the craft...

That's a demonstrably false statement. Fluff != rules.

**grendel083**

40k-noob wrote:
It think it is a misstatement to call a cryptek an "upgrade" to a Warriors unit.

You cannot buy or select a cryptek in the Warriors army list entry.

Cryptek are not purchased for any unit but the Royal Court, that they can be assigned to a warrior unit does not make them an "Upgrade" to that unit.

Anyway aside from that, i do agree that the "Repair Barge" can repair characters assigned to the warriors unit as they are members of that unit.

Sorry, I was referring to the previous editions definition of Upgrade Character. The principle remains in his edition, but the name doesn't.

**Tyr Grimtooth**

Were Royal Courts ever said to be exactly like Wolf Guard when they are joined to Grey Hunters, Blood Claws, etc, in that they become part of that unit? I have not read the Necron FAQ in forever.

**Kevin949**

Tyr Grimtooth wrote:
Were Royal Courts ever said to be exactly like Wolf Guard when they are joined to Grey Hunters, Blood Claws, etc, in that they become part of that unit? I have not read the Necron FAQ in forever.

If a model is not an independent character but is part of a squad there is no other thing for them to be but part of the squad. Even IC attached to squads are part of the unit for all rules purposes, they just have permission to leave. Realistically there is little difference between Characters and Characters with the IC rule.

And as has been pointed out, the FAQ about crypteks/lords leading Deathmarks and getting to benefit from Hunters from Hyperspace should lend credence to this.

**rigeld2**

Tyr Grimtooth wrote:
Were Royal Courts ever said to be exactly like Wolf Guard when they are joined to Grey Hunters, Blood Claws, etc, in that they become part of that unit? I have not read the Necron FAQ in forever.

No, they haven't.

If you don't treat them like Wolf Guard, then you run in to issues. You can try to hand wave them away, but there are issues.
In addition to the fact that there's literally no other way to consider them.