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.

Lungpickle wrote:
Again its just anger because they can embark and disembark while zooming, and not be destroyed when when the ship goes down.



Automatically Appended Next Post:
Im sure if ever it gets a FAQ some will be sadly disapointed to find they are in fact not wounded just dumped in reserves.

You seem to read a LOT of asininity into statements that disagree with you.

Most (all?) of the people are disagreeing because of rules, not anger.

I daresay none of them would be upset if an FAQ were to change the rules, regardless.

/shrug

Lungpickle wrote:
If it happenes before they are placed then they dont take a hit since they didnt crash they where put in reserves.

The hit happens before they go into reserves, as has been described.

Show us a rule that says models take wound in reserves.

Irrelevant since no on is saying that's what happens.

You all that are arguing this point know exactly what the intentions are of GW. Yet you argue it just to argue it.

Absolutely false. I've never met someone who works for GW (never been in a GW store... well, not since 5th grade anyway) so the only way for me to know intent is to read the rules as they are presented.

They are the only models embarked on a flyer that does not get hit when it crashes since they are placed in reserves insted. the s10 hit are for those hitting the ground and crawling out if they survive. you dont get to wound them and then have us place them so far back off the table to get a double benefit. its one way or the other.

Not the way the rules are written it's not. You're trying to apply intent with no evidence.

Again its just anger because they can embark and disembark while zooming, and not be destroyed when when the ship goes down.

Assigning bias without evidence isn't the right way to have a discussion/debate. Perhaps you'd like to present evidence?

Im sure if ever it gets a FAQ some will be sadly disapointed to find they are in fact not wounded just dumped in reserves.

It won't bother me either way tbh. Well, except for the fact that we won't ever need to have this debate again.
I'm curious though - what would you say if they FAQ it so that the unit does take damage?

rigeld2 wrote:

I'm curious though - what would you say if they FAQ it so that the unit does take damage?

Lungpickle would probably respond by saying that GW's FAQ as written have no bearing on how the game is played. This is based off of his latest posts.

Until it's FAQ'd it seems pretty clear they take the damage and go back in reserve. You can create fluff to work with either explanation.

Lungpickle wrote:
If it happenes before they are placed then they dont take a hit since they didnt crash they where put in reserves. Show us a rule that says models take wound in reserves. You all that are arguing this point know exactly what the intentions are of GW. Yet you argue it just to argue it. They are the only models embarked on a flyer that does not get hit when it crashes since they are placed in reserves insted. the s10 hit are for those hitting the ground and crawling out if they survive. you dont get to wound them and then have us place them so far back off the table to get a double benefit. its one way or the other.


Nor does the same rule your typing on here again and again. If the Night Scythe is destroyed, the embarked units enter reserve. see it dosent also say they take a hit. dosent say remaining undestoyed unit. says the unit.

Again its just anger because they can embark and disembark while zooming, and not be destroyed when when the ship goes down.



Automatically Appended Next Post:
Im sure if ever it gets a FAQ some will be sadly disapointed to find they are in fact not wounded just dumped in reserves.

Its the order of operations Lung.
1. The Flyer is wrecked / exploded.
2. The rule states "If the Flyer is a Transport (Nightscythe is) any models within Suffer a S10 hit with no armor saves allowed." Pg 81. No exceptions are made for your Nightscythe. Doesnt matter where you say the unit goes, reserves etc.. The rule states they take a S10 hit. That may change when the Necron codex goes to 6th edition.
3. If you read further. "Survivors are placed anywhere within 3" of the blast marker....." This is where your Nightscythe rule would come into play. Instead of placed on the board, they are placed back in reserves. Since the unit is not placed on the board, no tokens may be placed, so EL / RP will not save them.

Lungpickle wrote:
If it happenes before they are placed then they dont take a hit since they didnt crash they where put in reserves. Show us a rule that says models take wound in reserves. You all that are arguing this point know exactly what the intentions are of GW. Yet you argue it just to argue it. They are the only models embarked on a flyer that does not get hit when it crashes since they are placed in reserves insted. the s10 hit are for those hitting the ground and crawling out if they survive. you dont get to wound them and then have us place them so far back off the table to get a double benefit. its one way or the other.


Nor does the same rule your typing on here again and again. If the Night Scythe is destroyed, the embarked units enter reserve. see it dosent also say they take a hit. dosent say remaining undestoyed unit. says the unit.

The order of operations is clear. They take a hit and the survivors then disembark. The NS says they don't disembark. Nothing about them not taking a hit. Two separate rules and only one is overruled.

And the NS rules don't have to say they take a hit. The flyer rules already do. Requiring it in both places is redundant. The fact that you admit the listing has no reference to the hits proves our point.

First and foremost the unit went into reserves. How can you apply damage to a unit that is in reserve??

DougMcNaron wrote:
First and foremost the unit went into reserves. How can you apply damage to a unit that is in reserve??

Because by following the sequence in the rulebook, the damage happens before they are placed in reserve.
Going into reserve is about the last step, defiantly not "First and foremost".

DougMcNaron wrote:
First and foremost the unit went into reserves. How can you apply damage to a unit that is in reserve??

Rules citation please.

That's only true if you assume the Night Scythe rules replace the entirety of the transport rules in Crash and Burn.
There's no rules basis for that assumption.
Disagree? You're free to. It'd be great if you support that disagreement with something called "rules".

The RAW argument breaks down in regards to the Necron query. I remember in third edition when someone wanted to use orbital bombardment on my units held in reserve at the start of the game... How silly.

 Dozer Blades wrote:
The RAW argument breaks down in regards to the Necron query.

Only if you stop reading partly through it, or some other such silliness.

 Dozer Blades wrote:
The RAW argument breaks down in regards to the Necron query. I remember in third edition when someone wanted to use orbital bombardment on my units held in reserve at the start of the game... How silly.

Assertions without proof mean nothing.

Perhaps you'd like to cite rules? That'd be great, thanks.

I am of the opinion that any models embarked on the NS do not take the hit. The rulebook is clear on the order of operations for units that are in a flyer that crashes and burns. They take a S10 hit, and then are placed within 3 inches of the blast marker's final resting place in unit coherency.

Embarked necrons would follow this same order of operations if they did not have a more specific rule in their codex. The necron codex clearly states that, "If the night scythe is destroyed, the embarked unit is not allowed to disembark, but instead enters reserve (when they arrive, they cannot deep strike). It does not mention taking any kind of hit at all. It is a rule specific to a unit in a codex and should therefore trump the less specific rule in the rulebook. I feel like this represents a whole separate order of operations for models embarked upon a NS.

I'm not really concerned about how this one plays out, and will be happy to play it either way that the community around me plays it, but I'm certainly interested in seeing how people settle on this issue, and if it does get FAQ'd. Also would love to hear from any of the INAT people on this.

rigeld2 wrote:Perhaps you'd like to cite rules? That'd be great, thanks.

Oh my God would you stop!? Whereas Lungpickle is clearly wrong here, if you want to argue his point actually argue it, and stop demanding arguments and citations when you are giving none yourself. Seeing you post this over and over is head-wrecking.

 Godless-Mimicry wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:Perhaps you'd like to cite rules? That'd be great, thanks.

Oh my God would you stop!? Whereas Lungpickle is clearly wrong here, if you want to argue his point actually argue it, and stop demanding arguments and citations when you are giving none yourself. Seeing you post this over and over is head-wrecking.

Yea I am going to leave this right here in response.

Lorek wrote:
These are some of the basic tenets of You Make Da Call. Some of them clarify the Dakka Rules and some of them are guidelines to ensure relatively smooth rules discussions. If you find someone going against these tenets, feel free to refer them to this post. The Moderation Staff will also use these as moderation guidelines in this forum.

Tenets of You Make Da Call (YMDC):

1. Don't make a statement without backing it up.
- You have to give premises for a conclusive statement; without this, there can be no debate. For more detail on how to actually create a logically supported conclusion, please read this article on how to have an intelligent rules debate.

Taken from here:
http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/253892.page

 Godless-Mimicry wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:Perhaps you'd like to cite rules? That'd be great, thanks.

Oh my God would you stop!? Whereas Lungpickle is clearly wrong here, if you want to argue his point actually argue it, and stop demanding arguments and citations when you are giving none yourself. Seeing you post this over and over is head-wrecking.

http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/471175.page?userfilterid=47462
I've argued it. And that's just this thread - would you like me to search for the other one I've contributed to about this exact subject?



Automatically Appended Next Post:

 helium42 wrote:
I am of the opinion that any models embarked on the NS do not take the hit. The rulebook is clear on the order of operations for units that are in a flyer that crashes and burns. They take a S10 hit, and then are placed within 3 inches of the blast marker's final resting place in unit coherency.

You've combined 2 sentences of the Crash and Burn rule - it's important that they're separate.
They take the S10 hits.
The unit is placed.

Embarked necrons would follow this same order of operations if they did not have a more specific rule in their codex. The necron codex clearly states that, "If the night scythe is destroyed, the embarked unit is not allowed to disembark, but instead enters reserve (when they arrive, they cannot deep strike). It does not mention taking any kind of hit at all. It is a rule specific to a unit in a codex and should therefore trump the less specific rule in the rulebook. I feel like this represents a whole separate order of operations for models embarked upon a NS.

Codex only trumps BRB if there's a conflict. The only conflict in place vs disembark. Why are you trying to replace two rules, one of which doesn't conflict?

Okay here is a question for those stating the squad takes the S10 hits... Would say a squad of Immortals with a VeilTek be allowed to teleport out of a Nightscythe? You're asserting they count as embarked, right?

 Dozer Blades wrote:
Okay here is a question for those stating the squad takes the S10 hits... Would say a squad of Immortals with a VeilTek be allowed to teleport out of a Nightscythe? You're asserting they count as embarked, right?

No, because disembarking is not "moving normally" which is the movement the veil of darkness replaces.

(though keep in mind, I'm in the camp that they don't take the hit but I see the rules working against that.)

 Dozer Blades wrote:
Okay here is a question for those stating the squad takes the S10 hits... Would say a squad of Immortals with a VeilTek be allowed to teleport out of a Nightscythe? You're asserting they count as embarked, right?

Yes, they're embarked normally so no, they can't veil out.

How that question is relevant I'm not sure...

 Dozer Blades wrote:
You're asserting they count as embarked, right?

Being that the codex asserts it too, that part is not a stretch.

 Dozer Blades wrote:
Okay here is a question for those stating the squad takes the S10 hits... Would say a squad of Immortals with a VeilTek be allowed to teleport out of a Nightscythe? You're asserting they count as embarked, right?

They don't count as embarked, they are embarked. And no, since they are not moving, the vehicle is, they cannot use Veil.

rigeld2 wrote:

Automatically Appended Next Post:

 helium42 wrote:
I am of the opinion that any models embarked on the NS do not take the hit. The rulebook is clear on the order of operations for units that are in a flyer that crashes and burns. They take a S10 hit, and then are placed within 3 inches of the blast marker's final resting place in unit coherency.

You've combined 2 sentences of the Crash and Burn rule - it's important that they're separate.
They take the S10 hits.
The unit is placed.

What I am trying to argue is that the crash and burn rule never takes effect for the embarked unit inside, as the codex gives a completely different view of what happens when a wrecked or explodes result happens.

 helium42 wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:

Automatically Appended Next Post:

 helium42 wrote:
I am of the opinion that any models embarked on the NS do not take the hit. The rulebook is clear on the order of operations for units that are in a flyer that crashes and burns. They take a S10 hit, and then are placed within 3 inches of the blast marker's final resting place in unit coherency.

You've combined 2 sentences of the Crash and Burn rule - it's important that they're separate.
They take the S10 hits.
The unit is placed.

What I am trying to argue is that the crash and burn rule never takes effect for the embarked unit inside, as the codex gives a completely different view of what happens when a wrecked or explodes result happens.

You're trying to argue it, but you have no rules support for your argument

Codex explicitly says following things:
1) Unit is embarked on the NS.
2) When NS is destroyed, when we arrive at the step when models are supposed to disembark, unit is placed into reserve instead of disembarking.

It doesn't say that "instead of taking damage and disembarking, models are placed into reserve".

@Luide: The codex does not say: 2) When NS is destroyed, when we arrive at the step when models are supposed to disembark, unit is placed into reserve instead of disembarking.

What it says is: If the Night Scythe is destroyed, the embarked unit is not allowed to disembark, but instead enters reserve (when they arrive, they cannot Deep Strike).

I'm arguing that this rule replaces crash and burn as far as it applies to the embarked passengers. It spells out exactly what you do with the embarked passengers, and does not mention them taking a hit, or following normal emergency disembarkation rules up until the actual disembarkation. I believe that it is a special rule for the embarked troops in and of itself.

I may be proven wrong when an FAQ arrives, but until that time, the debate will fall along the lines of whether the NS's special rule replaces CnB for the embarked troops, or if it blends in with CnB and it's order of operations. To say that I have no rules to back up my perspective is either ignorant or said purposely to attack my credibility. I think I have made my argument clear enough for many people to see, even if they fall on the other side of it.

Just out of curiosity, are we sure this hasn't been amended in the necron Digi-dex for iPad?

i know that some bits were put in there and no-were else (Hyperphase swords confirmed as AP3 for exampel).

 helium42 wrote:
@Luide: The codex does not say: 2) When NS is destroyed, when we arrive at the step when models are supposed to disembark, unit is placed into reserve instead of disembarking.

What it says is: If the Night Scythe is destroyed, the embarked unit is not allowed to disembark, but instead enters reserve (when they arrive, they cannot Deep Strike).

I'm arguing that this rule replaces crash and burn as far as it applies to the embarked passengers. It spells out exactly what you do with the embarked passengers, and does not mention them taking a hit, or following normal emergency disembarkation rules up until the actual disembarkation. I believe that it is a special rule for the embarked troops in and of itself.

Yeah, I should have done verbatim quote. This doesn't change anything though, RAW it still doesn't replace Crash and Burn completely, it only replaces the final two sentences of the rules, ie "Survivors are placed....".
There are really only two options:
1) NS rule overrides Crash and Burn completely. This means destroyed flier wouldn't get removed from game, for example. Not a sane interpretation and using this one interpretation broadly breaks the game in about million places.
2) NS rule overrides Crash and Burn only on the parts that NS rules explicitly contradict CaB. And there's no contradiction about models getting S10 hits, the rules contradict each other only at the "Survivors are placed..." line so S10 hits are still taken. (Strict RAW, NS rules don't actually do anything as the models are 'placed' instead of 'disembarking', but strict RAW interpretations are often stupid)

 helium42 wrote:

I may be proven wrong when an FAQ arrives, but until that time, the debate will fall along the lines of whether the NS's special rule replaces CnB for the embarked troops, or if it blends in with CnB and it's order of operations. To say that I have no rules to back up my perspective is either ignorant or said purposely to attack my credibility. I think I have made my argument clear enough for many people to see, even if they fall on the other side of it.

FAQ's don't really 'prove' anything else than designer intent at the time of writing FAQs. FAQs change rules all the time and GW has few times first FAQ'd something as "Yes" and then changed their answer to "No" in later FAQ. Personally, I think they will FAQ it so that troops inside NS will not take hits, but until that happens, RAW is clear.
Note that I also think that by RAW, Swooping FMC's that are Grounded don't lose Hard to Hit, but I'd be very surprised if that doesn't get FAQ'd away also.

 helium42 wrote:
]
I'm arguing that this rule replaces crash and burn as far as it applies to the embarked passengers. It spells out exactly what you do with the embarked passengers, and does not mention them taking a hit, or following normal emergency disembarkation rules up until the actual disembarkation. I believe that it is a special rule for the embarked troops in and of itself.

Right. You're trying to replace two sentences and have no reason for doing so - the Night Scythe rule only conflicts with one.
It doesn't mention them taking the hit 1) because while the codec was written with 6th edition in mind it still dropped in 5th and 2) because by not mentioning it the rule doesn't conflict.

If it doesn't say you can, you can't. Nothing says you can avoid the hit. Therefore you can't.

rigeld2 wrote:

 helium42 wrote:
]
I'm arguing that this rule replaces crash and burn as far as it applies to the embarked passengers. It spells out exactly what you do with the embarked passengers, and does not mention them taking a hit, or following normal emergency disembarkation rules up until the actual disembarkation. I believe that it is a special rule for the embarked troops in and of itself.

Right. You're trying to replace two sentences and have no reason for doing so - the Night Scythe rule only conflicts with one.
It doesn't mention them taking the hit 1) because while the codec was written with 6th edition in mind it still dropped in 5th and 2) because by not mentioning it the rule doesn't conflict.

If it doesn't say you can, you can't. Nothing says you can avoid the hit. Therefore you can't.

In 5th edition embarked passengers took a hit when a vehicle exploded as well, so this isn't something entirely new for 6th. I would say that the models did not take that hit in 5th edition either.

I'm not replacing any sentence. I think that the entire wording for the NS special rule replaces the entire wording of the CnB rule for any unit embarked on the NS.

The parts done instead of disembarking are done instead of disembarking.

The fact is that CnB has things occur to embarked units prior to the rules about them disembarking.

Nothing circumvents that.

 helium42 wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:

 helium42 wrote:
]
I'm arguing that this rule replaces crash and burn as far as it applies to the embarked passengers. It spells out exactly what you do with the embarked passengers, and does not mention them taking a hit, or following normal emergency disembarkation rules up until the actual disembarkation. I believe that it is a special rule for the embarked troops in and of itself.

Right. You're trying to replace two sentences and have no reason for doing so - the Night Scythe rule only conflicts with one.
It doesn't mention them taking the hit 1) because while the codec was written with 6th edition in mind it still dropped in 5th and 2) because by not mentioning it the rule doesn't conflict.

If it doesn't say you can, you can't. Nothing says you can avoid the hit. Therefore you can't.

In 5th edition embarked passengers took a hit when a vehicle exploded as well, so this isn't something entirely new for 6th. I would say that the models did not take that hit in 5th edition either.

I'm not replacing any sentence. I think that the entire wording for the NS special rule replaces the entire wording of the CnB rule for any unit embarked on the NS.

Without any rules to back that up, it is just opinion.

I'll give this one last go and if there are still those that are unconvinced, I'll let it lie...

First, let's look at what rules are to be used when multiple rules contradict one another. This can be found on BRBpg7 under the Basic vs. Advanced section. This section has a few passages that are key to our conversation, so I'll included them here.
Quote 1: "Advanced rules apply to specific types of models, whether because they have a special kind of weapon, unusual skill, because they are different to their fellows, or because they are not normal infantry." This would include any rules that are specific to vehicles, or those that only apply to a specific type of vehicle (in our discussion this will be flyers, and more specifically zooming flyers).
Quote 2: "Where advanced rules apply to a specific model, they always override any contradicting basic rules."
Quote 3: "On rare occasions, a conflict will arise between a rule in this rulebook, and one printed in a codex. Where this occurs, the rule printed in the codex always takes precedence."

Second, we have rules in the rulebook about the wrecked result roll for a vehicle. These can be divided into 2 categories, the effect on the vehicle, and the effect on any passenger in the vehicle.

Vehicle Effects (I'll just assume we are talking about an explode result from here out for simplicity. A wreck result is the same for our final case (zooming flyers), but only similar for general vehicles) (BRBpg74):
1. "Vehicle is destroyed"
2. Nearby units suffer damage (paraphrase).
3. Vehicle Model is removed and replaced with a crater of similar size (paraphrase)

Effects on Passengers (again, just for explodes) (BRBpg80)
1. Passengers suffer damage (S4 AP-).
2. Passengers must disembark (into the space where the vehicle model used to be (as it was removed in #3 above).

So, these are general rules for the Explode result for all vehicles.

Third, we "Crash and Burn" (BRBPg81), which modifies most of the above effects for Flyers that are zooming (BRBpg81)

When Crash and Burn is applied, the Vehicle Effects above change to:
1. "Vehicle is destroyed" (no change)
2. Wreckage of the flyer scatters 2D6 and (potentially) damage any units the wreckage lands on. (changes location and amount of damage done to those outside the vehicle).
3. Vehicle Model is removed (change is no crater)

When Crash and Burn is applied, the Effects on Passengers above change to:
1. Passengers suffer damage (S10, no armor save allowed)
2. Passengers must disembark (into the space where the wreckage scattered in the vehicle effects above).

So, these are the effects of an Explode result on a Zooming Flyer that has no special rule that says otherwise, and by the rules on BRBpg7 take precedence for the specific case in which they apply (a zooming flyer that receives an explode result on the vehicle damage table).

Now, lets look at the Nightscythe's rules which has a model specific rule stating that when it is destroyed (either a wreck or an explode result on the vehicle damage table), it's "embarked unit is not allowed to disembark, but instead enters reserves."

So, there is no change to the Vehicle Effects (the Crash & Burn modified Vehicle Effects above still apply). However, this rule contradicts the Crash & Burn modified Effects on Passenger rule (as that requires a disembark and the Nightscythe says that its embarked passenger may not disembark). Hence (by the rules on BRBPg7) "the rule printed in the codex always takes precedence".

Hence, when the Nightscythe model specific rules are applied to the Vehicle Effects, we get:
1. "Vehicle is destroyed" (no change)
2. Wreckage of the flyer scatters 2D6 and (potentially) damage any units the wreckage lands on. (changes location and amount of damage done to those outside the vehicle).
3. Vehicle Model is removed (change is no crater)

When the Nightscythe model specific rules are applied to the Effects on Passengers we get:
1. Passengers unit goes into reserves.

You have to apply the codex rule as a whole. It can not override one effect on the passengers. It overrides all effects on the passengers.

That seems to be about as artfully as I can present this case. If that's not enough to convince you, I guess I'm not going to. I'm happy to wait until GW gets around to FAQing this. All the major tournaments that have done so to date of which I am aware have ruled no damage for the embarked passengers, so I'm pretty confident GW will do the same.

Peace out.