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.

IIRC in previous editions the guns in a fortification would be fired at the BS of one of the members of a unit that was embarked in the fortification or, in the case of the defense line, next to the gun. I can't find anything that says that this is still the case. So is the BS of the gun that of the fortification regardless of who is in it or next to it?

Yes, it always uses its Datasheet.

Thank you. As a follow up: If I use a fortification do I/can I substitute my general key word for "Imperium" when applying special rules from the data sheet (ie.,chaos, Tau, Necron)?

Leo_the_Rat wrote:
Thank you. As a follow up: If I use a fortification do I/can I substitute my general key word for "Imperium" when applying special rules from the data sheet (ie.,chaos, Tau, Necron)?

Unless i missed something, you use the datasheet as it is presented.

I didn't see any provision for exchanging Keywords.

I know there is something about fortifications and keywords not counting for overall faction, but I can not remember where that rule (if it exists) is.

Most Fortifications have the Unaligned Faction Keyword. This allows them to be included in a Matched Play Battle-Forged Army as they do not violate the rules for Army creation, nor placing units in a Fortifications Network Detachment by not having a Faction Keyword that matches the rest of your army.

The name of the fortification doesnt matter. The keyword is important. Necrons can use an imperial bunker, or an imperial bastion, because its keyword is UNALIGNED. But you cant use any stratagems/auras/MWBD on the embarked unit, because embarked units cannot be affected by anything.

The imperial defensive line has a rule stalwart defense which states that "imperium' infantry gains an advantage. So, if a Tau were to take that fortification would the word "imperium" change to "Tau" or would that rule not apply to anyone other than "imperium" forces?

If a rule says it only applies to IMPERIUM INFANTRY, then it only does that.

Leo_the_Rat wrote:
The imperial defensive line has a rule stalwart defense which states that "imperium' infantry gains an advantage. So, if a Tau were to take that fortification would the word "imperium" change to "Tau" or would that rule not apply to anyone other than "imperium" forces?

No. There is no such rule allowing the change. Tau have their own Fortifications that only works for them.

As do Orks!

*Looks at the mekboy workshop*

Technically.

 JNAProductions wrote:
As do Orks!

*Looks at the mekboy workshop*

Technically.

It is a little surprising that they haven't put out (at least in White Dwarf) a "Looted Bunker" datasheet for Orks, or rules to convert other bunkers to Orky ones.

Yeah, I feel sorry for the lack of orky fortifications. I mean look at all of the fortifications for the eldar....oh wait.

My problem is that the fortifications are supposed to be racially neutral (at least that's what unaligned means to me) but the special rules are only for the benefit of Imperial players. It doesn't seem unreasonable to me that "Imperium" could be replaced with "Race" to better reflect their non-alignment.

**looks over all of her glorious Necron fortifications**
Oh...right...

:: Plays nids. Quietly watching thread and looking at list of discontinued, FW only, nid terrain. ::

Leo_the_Rat wrote:
Yeah, I feel sorry for the lack of orky fortifications. I mean look at all of the fortifications for the eldar....oh wait.

My problem is that the fortifications are supposed to be racially neutral (at least that's what unaligned means to me) but the special rules are only for the benefit of Imperial players. It doesn't seem unreasonable to me that "Imperium" could be replaced with "Race" to better reflect their non-alignment.

Whatever UNALIGNED means to you, the fortifications that reference IMPERIUM are all clearly Imperium fortifications.

Of course, there should be mor fortifications for other factions. But if it's any consolation, most of the existing ones are pretty terrible for their points.

All right, then what does <Unaligned> mean per the rules? I can't find any definition for the term in the index or designers' notes. If the fortifications that are titled "Imperial X" were meant purely to be put in play by imperial forces wouldn't they have the keyword <Imperium>?

Leo_the_Rat wrote:
All right, then what does <Unaligned> mean per the rules? I can't find any definition for the term in the index or designers' notes. If the fortifications that are titled "Imperial X" were meant purely to be put in play by imperial forces wouldn't they have the keyword <Imperium>?

What UNALIGNED does can be found on page 214 of the main rulebook, under the heading 'Army Faction'.

That reference doesn't say what "Unaligned" means. It just says that any model with that keyword can be included in an army without matching any other keyword.

Leo_the_Rat wrote:
That reference doesn't say what "Unaligned" means. It just says that any model with that keyword can be included in an army without matching any other keyword.

There you go.

 JNAProductions wrote:

Leo_the_Rat wrote:
That reference doesn't say what "Unaligned" means. It just says that any model with that keyword can be included in an army without matching any other keyword.

There you go.

Exactly this.

"Unaligned" literally just means "that any model with that keyword can be included in an army without matching any other keyword."