Switch Theme:

Embarking onto a transport to escape assault?  [RSS] Share on facebook Share on Twitter Submit to Reddit
»
Author Message
Advert


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.




Made in us
Grisly Ghost Ark Driver





Somewhere over the rainbow, way up high

So, had an oddity come up in a game this week.

Playing against Dark Eldar, but i suppose any army could try this.

So, he had 2 raiders charge my troops side by side. One of the raiders was destroyed, and mostly surrounded, meaning the Kabalite unit inside had a little room to deploy. Half the squad died, but the other half were tied up in assault.

Now on his turn, the DE player embarked them onto the second, empty raider. This isn't technically a fallback move, but I couldn't think of a reason it...would not work? We allowed it to keep the game moving along, after which the raider zipped off to safety.

Did we do that right? I'll admit, it was honestly a little bizarre.

Bedouin Dynasty: 7k+ pts
The Silver Lances: 4k pts

MajorStoffer wrote:
...
Sternguard though, those guys are all about kicking ass. They'd chew bubble gum as well, but bubble gum is heretical. Only tau chew gum. 
   
Made in us
Dakka Veteran





As long as models in the unit are within range to jump on the raider then yeah it is totally legal.

 
   
Made in us
Longtime Dakkanaut





Iirc you are still required to move to embark, so if they were in assault they would have had to fall back to embark, which they could have done.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2018/05/14 04:12:42


 
   
Made in nz
Scarred Ultramarine Tyrannic War Veteran




Ankh Morpork

There's two parts to this - 'Falling Back' in the Movement phase rules, and 'Embark' in the Transport rules.

'Falling Back' tells us units starting the Movement phase within 1" of an enemy unit can either remain stationary or Fall Back to end their move more than 1" away from all enemy units.

'Embark' tells us that if all models in a unit end their move within 3" of a friendly transport they can embark inside.

If you cannot end your move more than 1" away from all enemy units, you must remain stationary. That suggests to me that you must be able to move all models in the unit more than 1" away from all enemy units AND to within 3" of the transport to be able to do this.
   
Made in hr
Homicidal Veteran Blood Angel Assault Marine





Germany

But do you have to fallback to embark on a transport ? I dont think so. Disembarking is not moving. You can disembark "through" enemy units surrounding a transport, because its not movement. Why should embark require moving ?

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2018/05/14 06:11:57


 
   
Made in no
Deranged Necron Destroyer





 p5freak wrote:
But do you have to fallback to embark on a transport ? I dont think so. Disembarking is not moving. You can disembark "through" enemy units surrounding a transport, because its not movement. Why should embark require moving ?


Yes,. But the moment you need to get in position you are falling back

Shiny 40k 8th tool with colors: dice-hammer.com 
   
Made in hr
Homicidal Veteran Blood Angel Assault Marine





Germany

What if my unit is within 1" of enemy models and within 3" of the transport at the same time ? There is no need to fallback.
   
Made in gb
Stormin' Stompa





 p5freak wrote:
What if my unit is within 1" of enemy models and within 3" of the transport at the same time ? There is no need to fallback.
Yes, they do.

The errata to embarking states "Embark: If all models in a unit end their move within 3" of a friendly transport in the Movement phase, they can embark within it."

It says "their move" not "their Movement Phase". Thus in order to embark you must select the unit to move, which means it must end that move more than 1" from the enemy, fallback or no fallback.

People who say "People who say "special snowflake" a lot tend to be unpleasant people" a lot tend to be unpleasant people.
Because some people get their knickers in a twist, I'll list these RaW 'oddities' in my sig. Sadly GW's promise of fixing their broken rules has itself been broken.
RaW you cannot advance and then fire assault weapons, you can't shoot pistols if within 1" of an enemy, "minimum" ranges don't work, Seraphim have to re-roll saves that "fail" pre-re-roll, the game simply breaks if you ever have more than one wounded model in a unit, the game also breaks if a single rule ever tries to do multiple things simultaneously, Khârn punches himself in the face if he's not near some meatshields, Librarians on Bikes are locked to the Index power list, Howling Banshees can't declare a charge further than 12", Spore Mines have an infinite range, Shroudpsalm technically doesn't do anything, only enemy models, not friendly models, have permission to move on top of a Skyshield Landing Pad, T'au have access to stackable Ignore Wounds (albeit against Mortal Wounds only), and T'au Early Warning Override Support System only works if a unit is "teleporting to the battlefield", not just arriving mid-battle, Genestealer Cults can no longer move after ambushing, and you can only ever use the Deathwatch Teleportarium Stratagem "once", and then never again in any battle after you use it.
Special Thanks to JohnnyHell for this one: A Tyrant Guard with Lashwhip can absorb an infinite amount of damage via Shieldwall between the time they die and the time they fight.
"I PUNCHED OUT ONE OF HIS HEARTS! WHY DOES NOBODY REMEMBER THAT?!" - Magnus the Red, Primarch of the Thousand Sons
Mathhammer tables for 2D6 and 3D6 Charging with various re-roll abilities - Stylish CSS theme for DakkaDakka forums to hide black avatar background and fully hide ignored users. 
   
Made in us
Grisly Ghost Ark Driver





Somewhere over the rainbow, way up high

So, in order to have this work effectively, the remainder of the squad needed to be within 3" of the second transport. I think it makes sense. Sounds like we did it right?

Bedouin Dynasty: 7k+ pts
The Silver Lances: 4k pts

MajorStoffer wrote:
...
Sternguard though, those guys are all about kicking ass. They'd chew bubble gum as well, but bubble gum is heretical. Only tau chew gum. 
   
Made in us
Longtime Dakkanaut





They also need to end their move.

Thus, they also need a rule permitting them to move.

The 'Fall back' rules specify that you can only move under certain conditions, although other rules may modify that.

In what sense did they 'end their move', as distinct from 'end the movement phase' or being considered for activation in the movement phase?
   
Made in us
Sister Vastly Superior




Tacoma, WA, USA

You elect the unit to move and have it remain stationary. That ends it move and allows it to embark.
   
Made in no
Deranged Necron Destroyer





 alextroy wrote:
You elect the unit to move and have it remain stationary. That ends it move and allows it to embark.


Well that guy made the point that if you Elect it to move while in CC, it has to end up 1" away from it's enemies.

Shiny 40k 8th tool with colors: dice-hammer.com 
   
Made in us
Sister Vastly Superior




Tacoma, WA, USA

And he is wrong. The rule is the unit must either remain stationary or fall back.
   
Made in us
Longtime Dakkanaut





Units can't move normally if within 1", they can elect to fall back which allows them to move within 1" but they have to end the fall back move 1" away from the enemy, if they could do that and be within 3" of the transport- barring any other special rules- they could embark.

If they are within 1" of enemy units and cannot fall back for some reason- not allowed to fall back, or can't get models from unit to be 1" or more from enemy with fallback move then, they would not be able to embark.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2018/05/14 17:07:08


 
   
Made in us
Dakka Veteran




Moving 0" does not count as movement.

The Leman Russ "Griding Advance" debate + FAQ resolution made this abundantly clear.

You can't end movement, if you didn't move in the first place. And if you did move, and were in CC, it HAS to end at least 1" away from all enemy models - and if it can't, then you can't move (fallback).
   
Made in us
Sister Vastly Superior




Tacoma, WA, USA

That debate does not prove anything. GW choose to end it with errata that resolved the question without making any comment on the actual debate.

The movement rules clearly state the unit can elect to remain stationary as its “movement” option. Choosing that ends the units movement, which then allows you to embark.
   
Made in us
Longtime Dakkanaut





You can elect to remain stationary as movement. But there is a rule that says you cannot move - whether 6" or 0" - unless you fall back.

So wouldn't you need to move to elect to remain stationary? And thus, wouldn't Fall Back prevent you from electing to move without falling back?
   
Made in hr
Homicidal Veteran Blood Angel Assault Marine





Germany

The FAQ/errata says that a unit can embark if they end their move within 3" of a transport. That doesnt mean that they have to move to be able to embark, just that they have to be within 3" from the transport. Disembarking is not moving, why should it be when they embark ? The only requirement to embark i see is that they are within 3" of the transport. RAW would mean that they cant embark if the transport comes to them and they didnt move, which is ridiculous.

"Sarge, there is our transport coming ! Quick, lets hop in, before those zerkers tear us apart. No ! We cant do it, that fething idiot driver parked to close, we cant move ! Now we are doomed !"
   
Made in no
Deranged Necron Destroyer





 p5freak wrote:
The FAQ/errata says that a unit can embark if they end their move within 3" of a transport. That doesnt mean that they have to move to be able to embark, just that they have to be within 3" from the transport. Disembarking is not moving, why should it be when they embark ? The only requirement to embark i see is that they are within 3" of the transport. RAW would mean that they cant embark if the transport comes to them and they didnt move, which is ridiculous.

"Sarge, there is our transport coming ! Quick, lets hop in, before those zerkers tear us apart. No ! We cant do it, that fething idiot driver parked to close, we cant move ! Now we are doomed !"


Well of the words say "end their move" then that's what the words say. Doesn't matter how silly it is. Of course I wouldn't play it like that but if someone makes the case, can't really deny it.

Shiny 40k 8th tool with colors: dice-hammer.com 
   
Made in us
Devestating Grey Knight Dreadknight




Disembarking counts as movement for shooting purposes so why shouldn't it count?
   
Made in hr
Homicidal Veteran Blood Angel Assault Marine





Germany

Leo_the_Rat wrote:
Disembarking counts as movement for shooting purposes so why shouldn't it count?


You cant move through enemy models, but you can still disembark from a completely surrounded transport. Because you are setting the models up within 3" of the transport and more than 1" away from enemy models. Its not moving, its setting up. If you can disembark that way you should be able to embark the same way.

This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2018/05/14 20:20:56


 
   
Made in nz
Scarred Ultramarine Tyrannic War Veteran




Ankh Morpork

 p5freak wrote:
If you can disembark that way you should be able to embark the same way.


Given the wording for embarking and disembarking are completely different, this is demonstrably false.

To end a move, a move must have been started. The unit must have actually moved to end that move.

When within 1" of an enemy unit, your own unit may only remain stationary (which is by definition not moving) or make a move and end that move at least 1" away from enemy models. If they are unable to do so they must remain stationary (which again is neither starting nor ending a move) so therefore cannot embark.

The reason you seemingly don't have to move to embark in other scenarios is because in those scenarios there's no requirement to move at least 1" away from enemy models, and you can claim the unit is simply moving 0.00001" before embarking.
   
Made in us
Sister Vastly Superior




Tacoma, WA, USA

The rules for the Movement Phase clearly state "Units starting the Movement phase within 1" of an enemy unit can either remain stationary or Fall Back". Those are your movement options. Remaining stationary is the move for the unit for that turn and is a legal option when starting within 1" of an enemy model. Thus, you can choose your move option as remaining stationary and then embark. It's really that simple.
   
Made in nz
Scarred Ultramarine Tyrannic War Veteran




Ankh Morpork

 alextroy wrote:
The rules for the Movement Phase clearly state "Units starting the Movement phase within 1" of an enemy unit can either remain stationary or Fall Back". Those are your movement options. Remaining stationary is the move for the unit for that turn and is a legal option when starting within 1" of an enemy model. Thus, you can choose your move option as remaining stationary and then embark. It's really that simple.


No, you can't just invent an alternate meaning for remaining stationary. It may be an allowed action in the case of units starting the Movement phase within 1" of enemy units, but that does not make it movement. By definition, remaining stationary is not moving. You cannot end a move that does not happen. You must move to embark, even if that move is only 0.00000000000000000001"
   
Made in se
Ork Boy Hangin' off a Trukk




Sweden

 Mr. Shine wrote:
 alextroy wrote:
The rules for the Movement Phase clearly state "Units starting the Movement phase within 1" of an enemy unit can either remain stationary or Fall Back". Those are your movement options. Remaining stationary is the move for the unit for that turn and is a legal option when starting within 1" of an enemy model. Thus, you can choose your move option as remaining stationary and then embark. It's really that simple.


No, you can't just invent an alternate meaning for remaining stationary. It may be an allowed action in the case of units starting the Movement phase within 1" of enemy units, but that does not make it movement. By definition, remaining stationary is not moving. You cannot end a move that does not happen. You must move to embark, even if that move is only 0.00000000000000000001"


This is the same reasoning as we had with the new leman russ turrent rule, where it was claimedby some that being stationary was not qualifying for moving less than half movement. It was FAQed to qualify. Thus I think a dude staying stationary within 3" of a transport can embark.

Brutal, but kunning!  
   
Made in gb
Stormin' Stompa





Gitdakka wrote:
This is the same reasoning as we had with the new leman russ turrent rule, where it was claimedby some that being stationary was not qualifying for moving less than half movement. It was FAQed to qualify. Thus I think a dude staying stationary within 3" of a transport can embark.
It was not "FAQed to qualify", it was given a proper errata, thus proving the people who said staying stationary didn't count correct.

People who say "People who say "special snowflake" a lot tend to be unpleasant people" a lot tend to be unpleasant people.
Because some people get their knickers in a twist, I'll list these RaW 'oddities' in my sig. Sadly GW's promise of fixing their broken rules has itself been broken.
RaW you cannot advance and then fire assault weapons, you can't shoot pistols if within 1" of an enemy, "minimum" ranges don't work, Seraphim have to re-roll saves that "fail" pre-re-roll, the game simply breaks if you ever have more than one wounded model in a unit, the game also breaks if a single rule ever tries to do multiple things simultaneously, Khârn punches himself in the face if he's not near some meatshields, Librarians on Bikes are locked to the Index power list, Howling Banshees can't declare a charge further than 12", Spore Mines have an infinite range, Shroudpsalm technically doesn't do anything, only enemy models, not friendly models, have permission to move on top of a Skyshield Landing Pad, T'au have access to stackable Ignore Wounds (albeit against Mortal Wounds only), and T'au Early Warning Override Support System only works if a unit is "teleporting to the battlefield", not just arriving mid-battle, Genestealer Cults can no longer move after ambushing, and you can only ever use the Deathwatch Teleportarium Stratagem "once", and then never again in any battle after you use it.
Special Thanks to JohnnyHell for this one: A Tyrant Guard with Lashwhip can absorb an infinite amount of damage via Shieldwall between the time they die and the time they fight.
"I PUNCHED OUT ONE OF HIS HEARTS! WHY DOES NOBODY REMEMBER THAT?!" - Magnus the Red, Primarch of the Thousand Sons
Mathhammer tables for 2D6 and 3D6 Charging with various re-roll abilities - Stylish CSS theme for DakkaDakka forums to hide black avatar background and fully hide ignored users. 
   
Made in gb
Ancient Venerable Dark Angels Dreadnought






 BaconCatBug wrote:
Gitdakka wrote:
This is the same reasoning as we had with the new leman russ turrent rule, where it was claimedby some that being stationary was not qualifying for moving less than half movement. It was FAQed to qualify. Thus I think a dude staying stationary within 3" of a transport can embark.
It was not "FAQed to qualify", it was given a proper errata, thus proving the people who said staying stationary didn't count correct.


Yet another case where RAI didn’t match RAW so they patched it, that’s all. Not an intellectual victory to trumpet about.

I scratch-built a Macharius, Thunderbolt, Spartan, Land Raider and more! Have a peek at the build and my painting progress here: https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/90/513429.page

 jojo_monkey_boy wrote:
Why are you guys all so obviously falling for that guy's trolling?
He's just one random guy on the internet with an opinion that is laughably divorced from reality. Move along.

 
   
Made in nz
Scarred Ultramarine Tyrannic War Veteran




Ankh Morpork

Gitdakka wrote:
This is the same reasoning as we had with the new leman russ turrent rule, where it was claimedby some that being stationary was not qualifying for moving less than half movement. It was FAQed to qualify. Thus I think a dude staying stationary within 3" of a transport can embark.


As BCB pointed out, this is incorrect. The wording was changed to include both remaining stationary or moving under half speed, so Games Workshop did the opposite of what you claim, and differentiated remaining stationary from being movement.
   
Made in se
Ork Boy Hangin' off a Trukk




Sweden

 Mr. Shine wrote:
Gitdakka wrote:
This is the same reasoning as we had with the new leman russ turrent rule, where it was claimedby some that being stationary was not qualifying for moving less than half movement. It was FAQed to qualify. Thus I think a dude staying stationary within 3" of a transport can embark.


As BCB pointed out, this is incorrect. The wording was changed to include both remaining stationary or moving under half speed, so Games Workshop did the opposite of what you claim, and differentiated remaining stationary from being movement.


Or you could say the text meant the same pre- and post FAQ. They did not feel the need to elaborate further until too many players complained about this certain rule. I would not view it as proof that "stationary" does not qualify for "moving less than" for all cases.

Brutal, but kunning!  
   
Made in us
Grisly Ghost Ark Driver





Somewhere over the rainbow, way up high

So i guess. It boils down to.

A. Does Embarking Count as Movement?
B. If so, I believe melee prevents movement other than a fallback or otherwise teleportation?

Bedouin Dynasty: 7k+ pts
The Silver Lances: 4k pts

MajorStoffer wrote:
...
Sternguard though, those guys are all about kicking ass. They'd chew bubble gum as well, but bubble gum is heretical. Only tau chew gum. 
   
 
Forum Index » 40K You Make Da Call
Go to: