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.

Kitzz wrote:Why do you assume "that" refers to turn?

I'm not, I'm deducing that it refers to that turns movement phase, due to context and sentence structure

Youre parsing the sentence incorrectly if you tie "that movement phase" to the restriction on disembarking

rigeld2 wrote:If you work in the us, you have to file taxes for that year.
So if you work in 2011 you file based on that year, not 2010 or 2012.

You cannot disembark if you went flat out in that movement phase.
So if you're in the assault phase of turn 3, which movement phase is "that" phase?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Kitzz wrote:Why do you assume "that" refers to turn?

Sentence structure.

It's actually more like filing quarterly taxes if you are self employed. Where each quarter is a phase, each year is a turn, taxes are disembarkation of funds, and the amount of profit/loss from your business is variable.

If your profits are less than your losses in that quarter, you don't pay taxes.

Now, it would be absurd to assume that you don't pay ANY quarterly taxes that year, just because in the first quarter you didn't have a net profit. Unfortunately, taxes are never going to be a perfect example, because you can get profit/loss each quarter, or each year, etc.

However, here's the way it goes:

Embarking/Disembarking:
Units may embark or disembark in the movement phase (Permission to disembark in the movement phase)

Shooting Vehicles:
A transport vehicle that explodes or is destroyed, has its troops dumped out of it (Permission to disembark WHENEVER a vehicle is destroyed)

Now, what this rule is stating, is that if a fast vehicle moves flat out in THAT movement phase, troops may not disembark. Troops are only given permission to voluntarily disembark during THAT movement phase, so the rule is restricting you from voluntarily disembarking.

This rule removes the allowance granted in the embarking/disembarking section of the transport rules, as you are no longer able to disembark in THAT movement phase.
It does not remove any other permissions, because the movement phase is the only phase mentioned in the rule.



At any rate, DR, you have failed to show where in the BRB it says that the effect lasts for the whole turn. You point and flail wildly at the sentence that says "in THAT movement phase" without any other qualifier and insist that means the whole turn. This logical jump is not sound.

I've said it once, and I'll say it again, if they wanted it to last the whole turn they would have written, "in that turn's movement phase". As it stands now, you are missing the word "turn", so it does not last a whole turn. The only length of time one can assume it lasts without adding any logical jumps, is in that movement phase when the vehicle moves.

Until anyone can show where "turn" comes from (and no, it can not be inferred, because there are no sentences before or after it in the same section that mention turn), the point has not been proven.

IF (the rulebook does not say turn)
THEN it must not mean turn.

It has been deduced from parsing the sentence correctly.

Rephistorch wrote:Until anyone can show where "turn" comes from (and no, it can not be inferred, because there are no sentences before or after it in the same section that mention turn), the point has not been proven.

IF (the rulebook does not say turn)
THEN it must not mean turn.

False statement.

You're in the shooting phase and must disembark. You check for permission. The rules state that you cannot disembark if you moved flat-out in that movement phase.

"that movement phase" must, in that case, refer to the movement phase of the current turn. It cannot refer to anything else.

rigeld2 wrote:

Rephistorch wrote:Until anyone can show where "turn" comes from (and no, it can not be inferred, because there are no sentences before or after it in the same section that mention turn), the point has not been proven.

IF (the rulebook does not say turn)
THEN it must not mean turn.

False statement.

You're in the shooting phase and must disembark. You check for permission. The rules state that you cannot disembark if you moved flat-out in that movement phase.

"that movement phase" must, in that case, refer to the movement phase of the current turn. It cannot refer to anything else.

You skipped the part that, while checking for permission, it is no longer THAT movement phase and has moved on to something totally unrelated.


EDIT: Nos, I defer to your grammar skills, and I may have missed a post earlier. Can you demonstrate how to parse the sentence for me? Like you always do with parenthesis and stuff?

You are both disagreeing about interpretation, not text.
Reading it as either referencing the movement phase flat-out was used - which is to say you when flat out that movement phase, not the one from the first turn.

Or reading it as flat out in that phase, that is movement - which is to say the current phase flat-out is used, which has to be movement phase.

I think.

kirsanth wrote:You are both disagreeing about interpretation, not text.
Reading it as either referencing the movement phase flat-out was used - which is to say you when flat out that movement phase, not the one from the first turn.

Or reading it as flat out in that phase, that is movement - which is to say the current phase flat-out is used, which has to be movement phase.

I think.

Yes - I believe that is the point that we disagree on. I'm with the first reading, and I don't see the second as a valid way to read the sentence.

rigeld2 wrote:
Yes - I believe that is the point that we disagree on. I'm with the first reading, and I don't see the second as a valid way to read the sentence.

Why not?

Unit1126PLL wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:
Yes - I believe that is the point that we disagree on. I'm with the first reading, and I don't see the second as a valid way to read the sentence.

Why not?

Because sentence structure/basic English tells us that the second is not a valid way to read the sentence.

Unit - but the question is "did the skimmer .... in that movement phase?" - to which the answer for that turn is YES

The sentence is parsed such that the whole "if...." could be included, logically, inside a parenthesis; it is the condition that must be met within the IF statement, it is not a requirement on the whole sentence

The BRB refers to your movement phase only, because it is talking about voluntarily disembarking, which can only ever be done in your movement phase.

If you move flat out and get shot down in your opponents phase, you do not lose the unit, you just emergency disembark.

This how it's been played in every tournament I've ever been aware of, I honestly am shocked this debate has lasted 4 pages.

Flat out would suck beyond comprehension if perma killed the occupants if the transport got shot down. It's very common for venom spam armies for instance to move flat-out on the first turn, this tactic would suck horribly if it risked the occupants lives.

nosferatu1001 wrote:Unit - but the question is "did the skimmer .... in that movement phase?" - to which the answer for that turn is YES

The sentence is parsed such that the whole "if...." could be included, logically, inside a parenthesis; it is the condition that must be met within the IF statement, it is not a requirement on the whole sentence

Ok, I see that. It's still a point of contention for me that it's flat WRONG to interpret it the other way, but I concede my point.

It's flat wrong because nothing about the sentence allows you to place braces around the "if..." to put "that movement phase" as applying to the whole sentence.

nosferatu1001 wrote:It's flat wrong because nothing about the sentence allows you to place braces around the "if..." to put "that movement phase" as applying to the whole sentence.

But it's not flat wrong, because there's nothing in the sentence that allows the effect to last the whole turn.

Your logical condition can be "did the skimmer move flat out ... in THAT movement phase" meaning the movement phase in which you are attempting to voluntarily disembark?

The answer is no, because you are not voluntarily disembarking, and it's not the movement phase.

It is valid to read the sentence this way, because there is absolutely no qualifier saying that it lasts for the whole turn.

ShadarLogoth wrote:The BRB refers to your movement phase only, because it is talking about voluntarily disembarking, which can only ever be done in your movement phase.

If you move flat out and get shot down in your opponents phase, you do not lose the unit, you just emergency disembark.

This how it's been played in every tournament I've ever been aware of, I honestly am shocked this debate has lasted 4 pages.

Flat out would suck beyond comprehension if perma killed the occupants if the transport got shot down. It's very common for venom spam armies for instance to move flat-out on the first turn, this tactic would suck horribly if it risked the occupants lives.

This is exactly correct. However, it isn't the question under discussion.

What we're discussing is whether the passengers die if the transport is shot down in YOUR Shooting phase; that is, if you for some reason shoot at your own vehicle on the same turn it has moved Flat Out.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Rephistorch wrote:

But it's not flat wrong, because there's nothing in the sentence that allows the effect to last the whole turn.

Your logical condition can be "did the skimmer move flat out ... in THAT movement phase" meaning the movement phase in which you are attempting to voluntarily disembark?

The answer is no, because you are not voluntarily disembarking, and it's not the movement phase.

It is valid to read the sentence this way, because there is absolutely no qualifier saying that it lasts for the whole turn.

But it doesn't say 'voluntarily disembark'. It just says 'disembark'. If the BGB was referring to voluntary disembarkation alone, there would be no argument; you would ALWAYS be allowed to perform an Emergency Disembarkation, because it isn't voluntary. But the BGB doesn't say that, so the question of whether the disembarkation is voluntary or not is irrelevant.

It is possible to disembark in phases other than the Movement phase. However, grammatically speaking, if a situation where you must disembark arises in the same turn as the transport moved Flat-Out, you are not allowed to do so. Please note that at this point, the FAQ has not been referred to, because so far it's irrelevant. We're not talking about a Movement phase, and the FAQ only deals with a Movement phase.

AFTER we have determined that we're not allowed to disembark, we then ask what happens to the unit. It can't be in the vehicle because the vehicle is destroyed; it can't disembark, because it's not allowed to. There's no explicit answer, so we look for precedent. The FAQ gives us precedent; in a very similar situation, when unable to disembark, the unit is destroyed. Therefore, we destroy the unit.

Reph - if you attempt to disembark in the shooting phase, and the skimmer moved flat out in THAT movement phase [of the turn] then you may not disembark

Nos, you're usually right about things, but in this case, I think you're being a bit ott. Both parsings are valid ways to interpret the rule. One is not "flat wrong" or "flat right." To assume that your interpretation is better simply because it appeals to your preferred parsing of the language is unnecessary and fallacious.

This is one where I agree to disagree. Both sides have valid arguments. I could see GW supporting either interpretation.

I'm not disagreeing with your interpretation, I'm disagreeing with your attitude about the interpretation.

BeRzErKeR wrote:

ShadarLogoth wrote:The BRB refers to your movement phase only, because it is talking about voluntarily disembarking, which can only ever be done in your movement phase.

If you move flat out and get shot down in your opponents phase, you do not lose the unit, you just emergency disembark.

This how it's been played in every tournament I've ever been aware of, I honestly am shocked this debate has lasted 4 pages.

Flat out would suck beyond comprehension if perma killed the occupants if the transport got shot down. It's very common for venom spam armies for instance to move flat-out on the first turn, this tactic would suck horribly if it risked the occupants lives.

This is exactly correct. However, it isn't the question under discussion.

What we're discussing is whether the passengers die if the transport is shot down in YOUR Shooting phase; that is, if you for some reason shoot at your own vehicle on the same turn it has moved Flat Out.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Rephistorch wrote:

But it's not flat wrong, because there's nothing in the sentence that allows the effect to last the whole turn.

Your logical condition can be "did the skimmer move flat out ... in THAT movement phase" meaning the movement phase in which you are attempting to voluntarily disembark?

The answer is no, because you are not voluntarily disembarking, and it's not the movement phase.

It is valid to read the sentence this way, because there is absolutely no qualifier saying that it lasts for the whole turn.

But it doesn't say 'voluntarily disembark'. It just says 'disembark'. If the BGB was referring to voluntary disembarkation alone, there would be no argument; you would ALWAYS be allowed to perform an Emergency Disembarkation, because it isn't voluntary. But the BGB doesn't say that, so the question of whether the disembarkation is voluntary or not is irrelevant.

It is possible to disembark in phases other than the Movement phase. However, grammatically speaking, if a situation where you must disembark arises in the same turn as the transport moved Flat-Out, you are not allowed to do so. Please note that at this point, the FAQ has not been referred to, because so far it's irrelevant. We're not talking about a Movement phase, and the FAQ only deals with a Movement phase.

AFTER we have determined that we're not allowed to disembark, we then ask what happens to the unit. It can't be in the vehicle because the vehicle is destroyed; it can't disembark, because it's not allowed to. There's no explicit answer, so we look for precedent. The FAQ gives us precedent; in a very similar situation, when unable to disembark, the unit is destroyed. Therefore, we destroy the unit.

Just to correct a minor mistake, you can perform an emergency disembarkation even if you are not forced to disembark. Any time you want to disembark, but your exits are blocked by either impassable terrain or enemy units, you can attempt an emergency disembarkation.

nosferatu1001 wrote:Reph - if you attempt to disembark in the shooting phase, and the skimmer moved flat out in THAT movement phase [of the turn] then you may not disembark

That's the problem. You're adding [of the turn]. You really should be saying "in THAT movement phase" period. Is it that movement phase (the phase itself) anymore? No - then you may disembark.

Here are a several different ways to interpret this sentence. I can understand where the first 2 or 3 stances are coming from, however, I believe the first one to be most correct.
1. if the fast transport vehicle moves flat out in that movement phase (in which you want or need to disembark), units inside may not disembark.
2. if the fast transport vehicle moves flat out in that [turn's] movement phase (in which you want or need to disembark), units inside may not disembark.
3. if the fast transport vehicle moves flat out in that [game turn's] movement phase (in which you want or need to disembark), units inside may not disembark.
4. if the fast transport vehicle moves flat out in that [game's first] movement phase (in which you want or need to disembark), units inside may not disembark.
5. if the fast transport vehicle moves flat out in that [game's last] movement phase (in which you want or need to disembark), units inside may not disembark.
6. if the fast transport vehicle moves flat out in that [anything you want here] movement phase (in which you want or need to disembark), units inside may not disembark.

The rules do not tell us to add further qualifiers (turn, game turn), therefore we must look to what it says, which is "in that movement phase". Adding any other modifiers, whatsoever, is not following what is written.

Again I pose the question, if it's not limited to your movement phase, why is it limited to your player turn? Why isn't it limited to your whole game turn? The most logical reading of this sentence is to take what is written and not add any additional qualifiers.

Because once you get round to a new turn you have a new movement phase.

Who's new turn? Yours? Your Opponents?

Once you get to a new phase, it's no longer "that" movement phase.

Also, congrats on the 16000th post!

Rephistorch wrote:Who's new turn? Yours? Your Opponents?

Once you get to a new phase, it's no longer "that" movement phase.

No, but "that movement phase" still refers to the most recent one.

"Passengers may not embark or disembark from a fast vehicle if it has moved (Or is going to move) flat out in that movement phase."

The sentence could be worded like this and have the exact same meaning as it does now:

if a fast vehicle has moved (Or is going to move) flat out in the movement phase then Passengers may not embark or disembark.

Ouch, 16000......

Youre not asking if it is THAT movement phase, but whether the SKIMMER moved in that movement phase.

Rephistorch wrote:
Just to correct a minor mistake, you can perform an emergency disembarkation even if you are not forced to disembark. Any time you want to disembark, but your exits are blocked by either impassable terrain or enemy units, you can attempt an emergency disembarkation.

Fair enough, though it doesn't have any bearing on the argument. Thanks for the correction, though!

Rephistorch wrote:
That's the problem. You're adding [of the turn]. You really should be saying "in THAT movement phase" period. Is it that movement phase (the phase itself) anymore? No - then you may disembark.

Here are a several different ways to interpret this sentence. I can understand where the first 2 or 3 stances are coming from, however, I believe the first one to be most correct.
1. if the fast transport vehicle moves flat out in that movement phase (in which you want or need to disembark), units inside may not disembark.
2. if the fast transport vehicle moves flat out in that [turn's] movement phase (in which you want or need to disembark), units inside may not disembark.
3. if the fast transport vehicle moves flat out in that [game turn's] movement phase (in which you want or need to disembark), units inside may not disembark.
4. if the fast transport vehicle moves flat out in that [game's first] movement phase (in which you want or need to disembark), units inside may not disembark.
5. if the fast transport vehicle moves flat out in that [game's last] movement phase (in which you want or need to disembark), units inside may not disembark.
6. if the fast transport vehicle moves flat out in that [anything you want here] movement phase (in which you want or need to disembark), units inside may not disembark.

The rules do not tell us to add further qualifiers (turn, game turn), therefore we must look to what it says, which is "in that movement phase". Adding any other modifiers, whatsoever, is not following what is written.

Again I pose the question, if it's not limited to your movement phase, why is it limited to your player turn? Why isn't it limited to your whole game turn? The most logical reading of this sentence is to take what is written and not add any additional qualifiers.

Except that what you're not getting is that we're not adding any qualifiers. You, rather, are removing one.

In order for what you're arguing to be correct, the sentence would have to read "in that phase", rather than "in that movement phase". By distinguishing the type of phase, the meaning of the sentence is changed.

At some time (let's leave that unspecified for now) a squad is forced to disembark from a destroyed vehicle. The player consults the rulebook to see if that's possible; he reads, " If the fast transport vehicle moves flat out in that movement phase, units inside may not disembark."

That's a check that you have to perform before disembarking. It doesn't matter when or under what conditions; you always have to ask that question, and only if the answer is 'no, it didn't' are you allowed to disembark. So the player asks himself, "Did the vehicle move Flat Out in that movement phase?"

The phrasing of the question, itself, immediately eliminates the possibility that the question is referring to 'the phase in which you must disembark'. Why? Because it specifies "that movement phase". It doesn't change according to what the current phase is. If you're forced to disembark in a Shooting phase, or an Assault phase, the question is STILL referencing "that movement phase"; and clearly, that's not the phase you're in. The question, then, is which movement phase it's referring to.

We know from the phrasing that it's talking about some singular movement phase, which means that you aren't forever blocked from disembarking if you EVER move Flat Out. Furthermore, it doesn't say 'the' movement phase (which could be interpreted as any of them), it says 'that' movement phase. What movement phase might that mean? Well, it's not really specific, so we have to look at context to figure it out. What about the earlier part of the sentence, where it references embarking? That is clearly in reference to the Movement phase of the current turn. Given that, the interpretation of "this turn's movement phase" has more support than any other.

Kind of, did the skimmer move in that movement phase in which you are trying to disembark?

My full opinion is stated a couple posts above with the different examples of how the sentence is interpreted.

The rules do not tell us to add further qualifiers (turn, game turn), therefore we must look to what it says, which is "in that movement phase". Adding any other modifiers, whatsoever, is not following what is written.

Again I pose the question, if it's not limited to your movement phase, why is it limited to your player turn? Why isn't it limited to your whole game turn? The most logical reading of this sentence is to take what is written and not add any additional qualifiers.

Rephistorch wrote:Kind of, did the skimmer move in that movement phase in which you are trying to disembark?

That cannot be the correct interpretation, for the reasons I just outlined.

BeRzErKeR wrote:That's a check that you have to perform before disembarking. It doesn't matter when or under what conditions; you always have to ask that question, and only if the answer is 'no, it didn't' are you allowed to disembark. So the player asks himself, "Did the vehicle move Flat Out in that movement phase?"

The phrasing of the question, itself, immediately eliminates the possibility that the question is referring to 'the phase in which you must disembark'. Why? Because it specifies "that movement phase". It doesn't change according to what the current phase is. If you're forced to disembark in a Shooting phase, or an Assault phase, the question is STILL referencing "that movement phase"; and clearly, that's not the phase you're in. The question, then, is which movement phase it's referring to.

The rule has to work all the time; there are no limits on which phases it applies in. That being so, it is still in effect if you're trying to in a Shooting or Assault phase. However, it specifically asks about that MOVEMENT phase. That CANNOT be the phase you're trying to disembark in, because you are not trying to disembark in ANY movement phase. But the question is still asking about a Movement phase, you can't get away from that. So. . . which MOVEMENT phase is it referring to?

Basic sentence structure...

"Passengers may not embark onto or disembark from a
fast vehicle if it has moved (or is going to move) flat
out in that Movement phase."

The first it is a reference to the vehicle, therefore what moves is the vehicle, not the embarked unit. Thus, the condition of "that movement phase" is a reference to when the vehicle moved.

The rule is phrased in the present tense, since it's primary function is to clarify that a unit may not embark or disembark from a transport that moves flat out.

However, the condition of the if statement is if the vehicle has moved in 'that' movement phase.

Think of 'that' as a computer variable. In your movement phase, it is initialized to 'stationary' Then when you move the transport flat-out it is set to 'flat-out'. It stays 'flat-out' until your next movement phase.

This exact logic can be seen in the other effects of flatting out.

For example, the assault rules:
"Fast vehicles that moved 'flat out' in the previous turn
and are not immobilised are hit on a 6 in assaults
(exactly as if moving at cruising speed)."

And shooting:
Fast vehicles moving flat out may fire no weapons.


So while you can very well chose to read the wording of the transport disembark clause however you wish, no one has yet to explain why it only counts as having moved flat out in JUST that movement phase, when moving flat out clearly affects other phases (as plainly demonstrated by the above rules).

So I'll ask again, which seems more logical, that they added a poorly worded specific exception to how flat-out works for disembarking, or that the rule was simply not worded to properly deal with this situation, and it was generally assumed that people would make the assumption that it was still considered flat-out by the rest of the rules?

In short, everyone is putting way too much thought into it. Ask your TO or roll it off if there's a problem

WanderingFox wrote:

Think of 'that' as a computer variable. In your movement phase, it is initialized to 'stationary' Then when you move the transport flat-out it is set to 'flat-out'. It stays 'flat-out' until your next movement phase.

This exact logic can be seen in the other effects of flatting out.

For example, the assault rules:
"Fast vehicles that moved 'flat out' in the previous turn
and are not immobilised are hit on a 6 in assaults
(exactly as if moving at cruising speed)."

And shooting:
Fast vehicles moving flat out may fire no weapons.


So while you can very well chose to read the wording of the transport disembark clause however you wish, no one has yet to explain why it only counts as having moved flat out in JUST that movement phase, when moving flat out clearly affects other phases (as plainly demonstrated by the above rules).

Not quite right, the word "that" is referring to the logical order of events. Movement would be your variable.

Assumptions:
Movement is a simple floating point number (usually between 0-24 for fast vehicles that are also skimmers)
Upon the beginning of YOUR movement phase movement is cleared, and reset to 0.

Alright here we go, pseudo-code for logic of all of the specified scenarios:
Assault:
if (movement > 6 && phase == assault && immobilized == false) //this line is true both in your assault phase, and your opponents
toHit = 6;
Shooting:
canShoot = (movement <= 12 && phase == shooting && turn == yours); //PotMS can still shoot with a special rule, but for vehicle shooting, this works
So, disembarking:
canDisembark = (movement <= 12 && phase == movement && turn == yours); (Least Restrictive, you can't disembark in THAT movement phase)

Your theory is
canDisembark = (movement <= 12 && turn == yours); (Restrictive, can't disembark for the whole player turn)
Another theory is
canDisembark = (movement <= 12); (most restrictive, can't disembark until movement is cleared on your own turn)

The problem is, the rules in the BRB don't tell you that disembarkation is disallowed for the player turn. It also doesn't tell you that it's disallowed for the game turn. It only tells you that it is disallowed in that movement phase when a fast transport moves flat out.

Rephistorch wrote:
The problem is, the rules in the BRB don't tell you that disembarkation is disallowed for the player turn. It also doesn't tell you that it's disallowed for the game turn. It only tells you that it is disallowed in that movement phase when a fast transport moves flat out.

The bolded line there is incorrect. What it tells is that disembarkation is disallowed, if the vehicle has moved flat-out in that movement phase.

It makes a difference, it honestly does. And you still haven't answered my question; given that the sentence literally CANNOT be referring to 'the phase in which you disembark', since it applies to ALL phases (and you can be forced to disembark in any of them) but tells you to check whether the vehicle moved flat-out in the MOVEMENT phase specifically, what tells you that you are allowed to disembark in, say, the Shooting phase of a turn in which the vehicle has moved flat-out?

^

This.

Like I believe I stated earlier... 40k is a permissive ruleset. There is no permission granted to disembark in the shooting phase when a flat-out transport is destroyed.

The only thing you're given is that you're allowed to 'if possible' You are also given a specific check that if a vehicle moves flat out in its movement phase its passengers may not disembark or embark.

Your logic hinges on the idea that the restriction only applies to the movement phase, and yet you are never told so. It only ever mentions what phase to CHECK to see if you moved flat out.

Again, your point makes no sense from a logical (albeit non-game perspective) point of view, nor does it make any sense RAI given the function of all other restrictions based on flat-out movement.

In short, if you allow models to disembark from a wrecked flat-out transport, you must also logically deny that transport a cover save since it is no longer moving flat out when it was destroyed.

The above is obviously not true given the current assault rules, the reasoning for them given in the BRB, and general logic.

So, while I can agree that you may be able to interpret the sentence differently if you so choose, you are not seeing the forest for the trees. Step back and look at the rest of the rules, and then try and understand the other side of this debate. If everything else works one way, why should one thing work any differently?