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.

So obviously Ynnari infantry can use power from death when a transport dies.

my question is can an embarked unit do so when its transport is removed.

the rulebook says that "if a transport is destroyed, any units embarked within it immediately disembarks before the transport model is removed"


what say you?
can they soulburst?

I think no.

The transport was not destroyed within 7" of the embarked unit. Only immediately after the transport was destroyed is the embarked unit set up within 3" of the already-destroyed transport, before its model is removed.

Possibly there is an argument to be made that these things happen simultaneously, but note that your transports are generally going to get destroyed on your opponent's turn, which means they can choose to force you to pick a Soulburst target before the embarked units disembark.

I can see your argument, however the rulebook clearly states that the transport is removed after the unit is disembarked.

clearly the unit is within the 7" (since it has to be deployed within 3" of the transport).

I guess you can argue that the transport is destroyed earlier, but I can find any rules to support that (only the order or deploying before removing the model).

 mgrosh wrote:
I guess you can argue that the transport is destroyed earlier, but I can find any rules to support that (only the order or deploying before removing the model).

If a model's wounds are reduced to 0, it counts as destroyed - Resolve Attacks section. At that point ynnari unit would still be embarked on a vehicle.

 mgrosh wrote:
I can see your argument, however the rulebook clearly states that the transport is removed after the unit is disembarked.

clearly the unit is within the 7" (since it has to be deployed within 3" of the transport).

I guess you can argue that the transport is destroyed earlier, but I can find any rules to support that (only the order or deploying before removing the model).

What Shadenuat said, but also the rule you quote is saying that the transport was destroyed earlier: "if a transport is destroyed, any units embarked within it immediately disembarks before the transport model is removed". The transport being destroyed is the trigger for the units disembarking and the model being removed. It seems like a stretch to read that as giving a process for destroying a transport (surely this would be more like: "to destroy a transport...").

Word of the Phoenix works on any unit correct?

Revenant titan ?

I foresee much destruction on the field.

 Shadenuat wrote:

 mgrosh wrote:
I guess you can argue that the transport is destroyed earlier, but I can find any rules to support that (only the order or deploying before removing the model).

If a model's wounds are reduced to 0, it counts as destroyed - Resolve Attacks section. At that point ynnari unit would still be embarked on a vehicle.

I love when people quote rules without quoting the whole rule inorder to prove their point of view. (that's sarcasm)

the actual quote is "If a models wounds are reduced to 0, it is either slain or destroyed and removed from play" *emphases mine

 mgrosh wrote:

 Shadenuat wrote:

 mgrosh wrote:
I guess you can argue that the transport is destroyed earlier, but I can find any rules to support that (only the order or deploying before removing the model).

If a model's wounds are reduced to 0, it counts as destroyed - Resolve Attacks section. At that point ynnari unit would still be embarked on a vehicle.

I love when people quote rules without quoting the whole rule inorder to prove their point of view. (that's sarcasm)

the actual quote is "If a models wounds are reduced to 0, it is either slain or destroyed and removed from play" *emphases mine

How does this help you? This is completely consistent with and even implies that there is a difference a model being destroyed and it being removed from play. Two things happen when a model's wounds are reduced to 0. It is destroyed. And it is removed from play. The transport rules say that, with transports, you don't actually remove the model from play until you do the emergency disembark, but says nothing about delaying its destruction (and as I said earlier seems to say that the transport's destruction is the trigger for the disembark anyway).

all I'm saying is that so far I have not seen anything in the "rules" that says what your trying to infer... I know that everyone is still on 7th with having to make up rules but this is 8th. they seem to have make pretty straight forward rules.

 mgrosh wrote:
all I'm saying is that so far I have not seen anything in the "rules" that says what your trying to infer... I know that everyone is still on 7th with having to make up rules but this is 8th. they seem to have make pretty straight forward rules.

What? The rules seem pretty clear that the transport is destroyed before or at least simultaneously with the disembark. You're the one who's been assuming without argument that the transport does not count as being destroyed until its model is removed. Everything that's been quoted so far, including what you quoted with your really weird "gotcha" post, seems to support the position that the transport being destroyed is separable from the removal of its model.

Let's go through this slowly. You have a transport with a unit in it. I reduce your transport to 0 wounds. It is destroyed. A few things happen when the transport is destroyed. You get to nominate a unit to Soulburst, and your embarked unit has to disembark. If the transport is not destroyed yet then your unit isn't disembarking, because that happens only when the transport is destroyed. Best case for you, the Soulburst nomination and the emergency disembarkation are simultaneous -- both trigger when the transport is destroyed. Now, maybe you can then argue that the transport was destroyed within 7" of your newly set-up unit, and if you haven't made your Soulburst nomination yet you can still do that and the unit will be eligible even though it wasn't actually within 7" of the transport when it was destroyed. But it's probably my turn, and so of course I can choose to force you to make your Soulburst nomination before disembarking according to the sequencing rules. So I think that at most all you can reasonably argue for is being able to Soulburst out of a destroyed transport if your transport is destroyed on your own turn, and even there I think it'd be pretty reasonable to object that the unit was not within 7" of the transport when it was destroyed and so is not an eligible target.

Where do you think that goes wrong or is unjustified? Last time all you did was note that the transport model is removed only after the unit disembarks, but I don't see any relevant rules that care about the model being removed, only about the model being destroyed.

not sure how any of what people are saying helps. The model is destroyed within 7" of the unit (they didn't teleport in...the transport is clearly within 7"). Therefore soulburst is possible for embarked unit. I would like a clarification, but I see no issue with it rules wise as it stands currently.
As for Word of Phoenix, I still think that will only help units that can use soulburst, which is bikes and infantry.

The transport is destroyed when the unit is embarked and not on the board, where the rules tell us they are, for all purposes, not in play. But then the unit disembarks before it is removed from play, which is why the question becomes is the 'removed from play' action part of the destruction of a unit?

Since Strength from Death triggers when a unit is 'completely' destroyed, I'd argue that the time in between being on the table with 0 wounds and being removed from play constitutes the destruction as being 'incomplete'.

But it is a tricky one, I can't adamantly defend my position.

As for Word of the Phoenix, it bypasses the need for a target unit to have the Strength from Death special rule, it can target any unit with the Ynnari keyword. It has the same wording as Ancestors' Grace.

 Oaka wrote:
The transport is destroyed when the unit is embarked and not on the board, where the rules tell us they are, for all purposes, not in play. But then the unit disembarks before it is removed from play, which is why the question becomes is the 'removed from play' action part of the destruction of a unit?

Since Strength from Death triggers when a unit is 'completely' destroyed, I'd argue that the time in between being on the table with 0 wounds and being removed from play constitutes the destruction as being 'incomplete'.

But it is a tricky one, I can't adamantly defend my position.

As for Word of the Phoenix, it bypasses the need for a target unit to have the Strength from Death special rule, it can target any unit with the Ynnari keyword. It has the same wording as Ancestors' Grace.

I wish. Word of the Phoenix implies that you are able to perform a Soulburst action in the first place. And Strength from Death specifies that only Ynnari infantry and bikes gain the ability to Soulburst. I don't even think this needs to be FAQ'd, but I guess it will anyways.

Definite no on soulbursting the unit inside a transport when the transport dies, I'm afraid. It's all about the order of events.

Here are the relevant rules
Strength From Death "Each time a unit is completely destroyed within 7" of one or more units with this ability"
Transport "If a transport is destroyed" (This has happened right now... not later. This is the point where Soulburst triggers) "any units embarked on it must immediately disembark".

Breaking that down... IF the transport is not destroyed, the infantry units are not on the table. And if the transport is not destroyed, strength from death has not yet triggered.


It would trigger IF the wording was "When a transport is reduced to zero wounds, all units embarked on it must immediately disembark. The transport is then destroyed."

But it's not!

LinkXx wrote:
I wish. Word of the Phoenix implies that you are able to perform a Soulburst action in the first place.

Well, not exactly. The rule just limits you to a unit that has not made a soulburst action before. By RAW soulbursting Wraithknights might totally be a thing until GW clarifies the rules.

Yeah, nothing in Word of the Phoenix implies that the unit has to have some other way to Soulburst. Strength from Death says nothing about being the exclusive means for units to Soulburst; it just gives certain units the ability to Soulburst under certain circumstances. There are other ways to Soulburst, such as by being the target of the Word of the Phoenix power.

 Silentz wrote:
Definite no on soulbursting the unit inside a transport when the transport dies, I'm afraid. It's all about the order of events.

Here are the relevant rules
Strength From Death "Each time a unit is completely destroyed within 7" of one or more units with this ability"
Transport "If a transport is destroyed" (This has happened right now... not later. This is the point where Soulburst triggers) "any units embarked on it must immediately disembark".

Breaking that down... IF the transport is not destroyed, the infantry units are not on the table. And if the transport is not destroyed, strength from death has not yet triggered.


It would trigger IF the wording was "When a transport is reduced to zero wounds, all units embarked on it must immediately disembark. The transport is then destroyed."

But it's not!

I don't mean to keep asking for actual rules but the few people who have replied to this thread saying its not possible have not provided any real rule arguments to prove their point. for example, your whole argument relies on (this happens now... not later) argument. can you post the rules that say that.

the side that thinks you can soulburt after the transport is destroyed have posted full rule quotes that show the transport is "completely destroyed" when "removed" from the table.

I'm not saying your wrong, just that your argument relies on your interpretation of when something happens. The actual rules it give a clear order to when to deploy the embarked unit vs when the transport is removed. and another rule clearly states that the transport is destroyed and removed when reduced to zero wounds.

I don't mean to keep asking you for the same thing but I started this thread asking for any rules "actually written in the rule book" to prove one side or the other. please leave the interruptions or made up rules off this thread.

No, no one has provided the slightest bit of evidence to show that a model being removed from the table has anything to do with determining whether it has been "completely destroyed". The only person who even suggested that this might be the case was Oaka, and he didn't quote a single thing. Meanwhile it's been shown that the rules draw a distinction between models being destroyed and models being removed from the table.

Dionysodorus wrote:
Meanwhile it's been shown that the rules draw a distinction between models being destroyed and models being removed from the table.

do you mind posting that rule they proves they are different?


they only one I see is this which leads one to believe they are one in the same. "If a models wounds are reduced to 0, it is either slain or destroyed and removed from play"

 mgrosh wrote:

Dionysodorus wrote:
Meanwhile it's been shown that the rules draw a distinction between models being destroyed and models being removed from the table.

do you mind posting that rule they proves they are different?


they only one I see is this which leads one to believe they are one in the same. "If a models wounds are reduced to 0, it is either slain or destroyed and removed from play"

I mean, that clearly suggests that they're different. A model which has its wounds reduced to 0 is destroyed and removed from play. Those are two things that happen to a model which is reduced to 0 wounds. There's no reason to read this as saying that removing the model from play is part of destroying the model; this is absolutely not how this construction generally works in English. "If A, X and Y" only rarely means that Y is an explanation of how to perform X. The normal way of reading this would be that A is a condition that triggers two effects, X and Y.

And then of course the transport rules are unambiguous that a model being destroyed is distinct from removing it from play -- you only have to emergency disembark if the transport is destroyed, and then you don't remove it from play until after. If the transport isn't destroyed until it's removed from play, then the models don't disembark.

that was very confusing.

so you think "If a models wounds are reduced to 0, it is either slain or destroyed and removed from play"

should actually read as "If a models wounds are reduced to 0, it is either slain or destroyed then perform any immediate actions before its removed from play"

well I'll be playing it the way I think it'll end up anyways. I used to be the devil's advocate and play things purely RAW, I've been stung by GW lawyering too many times, and I know the intent of this power, and see their general down-toning of power across the board. If this indeed would let any model double action, that be a bit strong, don't you think?

This way there won't be any ugly surprises when my whole list revolving around 1 power won't work anymore.

 mgrosh wrote:
that was very confusing.

so you think "If a models wounds are reduced to 0, it is either slain or destroyed and removed from play"

should actually read as "If a models wounds are reduced to 0, it is either slain or destroyed then perform any immediate actions before its removed from play"

No? I don't understand how you got that from what I posted. I think that the rule is saying to do two things when a model's wounds are reduced to 0. These appear to be simultaneous, though it'd be fair to read the order in which they're written as giving an order in which they happen. Regardless, the transport rules modify this, saying that the model is not removed from play until after the transport is destroyed and embarked units are set up.

You're trying to read the removal from play as somehow part of the process of destroying the model, but nothing supports this. You need removal from play to be part of a process of destroying a model in order for the disembarked unit to be able to Soulburst.

 Uriels_Flame wrote:
Word of the Phoenix works on any unit correct?

Revenant titan ?

I foresee much destruction on the field.

Nah - you have to have the strength from death special rule. It's really only infantry and bike infantry that have this rule.

Dionysodorus wrote:
No, no one has provided the slightest bit of evidence to show that a model being removed from the table has anything to do with determining whether it has been "completely destroyed". The only person who even suggested that this might be the case was Oaka, and he didn't quote a single thing. Meanwhile it's been shown that the rules draw a distinction between models being destroyed and models being removed from the table.

There is no definition of completely destroyed that I could find anywhere in the rules. We either treat it the same as destroyed, which happens whenever a unit is reduced to 0 wounds- hence, no soulburst for the embarked unit, or we have to define a new set of circumstances for what constitutes completely destroyed. I'm not sure why they didn't simply say destroyed in the rules for Strength from Death, but my hunch is that they didn't want soulbursts triggering off of units that are reduced to 0 wounds but then have a special rule that keeps them in the game.

Yeah I think "completely destroyed" is to stop SfD triggering after a disgustingly resilient model is reduced to 0 wounds but before it rolls it's 5+ to ignore it.

Embarked units do not disembark until after their transport has been destroyed, removing of models has nothing to do with SfD.

Word of the phoenix is written perfectly clearly and GW specifically ruled on this in one of their batreps- you can use it on units that are Ynnari but lack SfD.

Because of the unclarity my group has interpreted as ...

If the vehicle is 0 wounds (does not explode).. disembark the units.. remove the vehicle .. soulburst

If the vehicle is 0 wounds and explodes! the model is removed.. emergency disembark.. no soulburst.

That is consistent with how they FAQ'd 7th .. to which end there was no clarification in difference between a vehicle being removed before or after the models disembark.. the fact that their is that distinction now.. lead us to this house ruling on the matter until told otherwise.

For people interpreting you can Soulburst for the passenger when the transport is destroyed. Do the passenger inside takes D3 wounds when the vehicle explodes? If the answer is no then I think you cannot Soulburst.

Also, there is no "wrecked" vehicle anymore in 8th edition.

No soulburst.

The unit is placed before removing the vehicle so that you can measure the distance from the vehicle to disembark.

From a rules standpoint the unit is placed after the vehicle is destroyed, if it were placed before the vehicle we're destroyed the passengers would be subject to any explosion result from the vehicle- which they are not.

Further the RAW states " if a transport is destroyed, any units embarked within it immediately disembark before it is removed..."

As being destroyed triggers the disembark, the vehicle is destroyed before they are forced to disembark immediately.