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.

Let's pretend for a minute that your assertions are true, and that a mixed unit of bikes and not bikes have the ability to run with only a subset of the models in the unit (non-bikes).

In a scenario, this subset runs. Now answer this question: Did the unit run?

If you answer yes, you have broken the rules. Units choose to run, but Bikes can't run.

If you answer no, then where did that extra movement in the shooting phase come from on some of the models.

 DarknessEternal wrote:
If you answer yes, you have broken the rules. Units choose to run, but Bikes can't run.

If it's an infantry unit, the biker is a member of the unit for all rules purposes.
So the unit did run. The model on the bike cannot run.

The other way round?

nosferatu1001 wrote:
The other way round?

You mean if the unit is bikers with an infantry IC?
Can't run as the unit cannot elect to run.

Which goes back to the original question - why they have battlefocus.

... Which was already answered.

rigeld2 wrote:There's no oversight. They have the rule for completionists sake and so that a non-bike IC attached to the unit can use Battle Focus.

rigeld2 wrote:

nosferatu1001 wrote:
The other way round?

You mean if the unit is bikers with an infantry IC?
Can't run as the unit cannot elect to run.

rigeld2 wrote:... Which was already answered.

So you are flip flopping between the two?

Initially you said the non-bike IC could use battle focus, now you appear to think otherwise.

I agree they cannot run, so Eldar Jetbike units (not the upgrade for an IC) can never benefit from Battlefocus.

If I have misunderstood your change in position, please enlighten

Yes, I was mistaken in my first post (forgetting that units run, not models). That doesn't change the fact that the answer was already given in the thread.

rigeld2 wrote:

 DarknessEternal wrote:
If you answer yes, you have broken the rules. Units choose to run, but Bikes can't run.

If it's an infantry unit, the biker is a member of the unit for all rules purposes.
So the unit did run. The model on the bike cannot run.

We have two Independent Characters, one is on a bike, one is on foot.

What type of unit is that? Infantry? Bike? It clearly can't run, either way.

Your assertion that a unit of mostly Infantry is an Infantry unit is not logical.

 DarknessEternal wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:

 DarknessEternal wrote:
If you answer yes, you have broken the rules. Units choose to run, but Bikes can't run.

If it's an infantry unit, the biker is a member of the unit for all rules purposes.
So the unit did run. The model on the bike cannot run.

We have two Independent Characters, one is on a bike, one is on foot.

What type of unit is that? Infantry? Bike? It clearly can't run, either way.

Your assertion that a unit of mostly Infantry is an Infantry unit is not logical.

So you're saying the IC is not a member of the unit for all rules purposes?

rigeld2 wrote:

So you're saying the IC is not a member of the unit for all rules purposes?

I'm contending that rule of ICs doesn't remove any other constraints put upon the IC. For example, if he were on a bike, he wouldn't be able to Run by the restriction leveled in the Bike rules.

Retaining an ICs restrictions does not override the rule about being a member of the unit.

Secondly, you dodged my question about a unit of two ICs, one biked and one not.

 DarknessEternal wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:

So you're saying the IC is not a member of the unit for all rules purposes?

I'm contending that rule of ICs doesn't remove any other constraints put upon the IC. For example, if he were on a bike, he wouldn't be able to Run by the restriction leveled in the Bike rules.

Retaining an ICs restrictions does not override the rule about being a member of the unit.

... Right. The model could not run. That does not stop the unit (an Infantry unit) from running.

Secondly, you dodged my question about a unit of two ICs, one biked and one not.

I was on my iPad - I didn't dodge it, just didn't address it right then.
It's fairly obvious though - since the IC has to move within 2" of a friendly unit, and you cannot move two units simultaneously, the "winning" unit type would be the one that moved first.

rigeld2 wrote:

 DarknessEternal wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:

So you're saying the IC is not a member of the unit for all rules purposes?

I'm contending that rule of ICs doesn't remove any other constraints put upon the IC. For example, if he were on a bike, he wouldn't be able to Run by the restriction leveled in the Bike rules.

Retaining an ICs restrictions does not override the rule about being a member of the unit.

... Right. The model could not run. That does not stop the unit (an Infantry unit) from running.

This breaks a rule then. Since you have a bike that just ran. Only units can run.

rigeld2 wrote:

 DarknessEternal wrote:

Secondly, you dodged my question about a unit of two ICs, one biked and one not.

I was on my iPad - I didn't dodge it, just didn't address it right then.
It's fairly obvious though - since the IC has to move within 2" of a friendly unit, and you cannot move two units simultaneously, the "winning" unit type would be the one that moved first.

They can be deployed together as one unit. So what's their unit type?

 DarknessEternal wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:

 DarknessEternal wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:

So you're saying the IC is not a member of the unit for all rules purposes?

I'm contending that rule of ICs doesn't remove any other constraints put upon the IC. For example, if he were on a bike, he wouldn't be able to Run by the restriction leveled in the Bike rules.

Retaining an ICs restrictions does not override the rule about being a member of the unit.

... Right. The model could not run. That does not stop the unit (an Infantry unit) from running.

This breaks a rule then. Since you have a bike that just ran. Only units can run.

The unit did run. The biker model did not.
Or are you trying to say the biker is not a member of the unit?

They can be deployed together as one unit. So what's their unit type?

Ask GW - it's unclear.
It always has been.

rigeld2 wrote:

The unit did run. The biker model did not.
Or are you trying to say the biker is not a member of the unit?

No, YOU are the one saying the biker is not a member of the unit. YOU said the unit ran, therefore the bike ran. But bikes can't run. Therefore you broke some rules along the way.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

rigeld2 wrote:

They can be deployed together as one unit. So what's their unit type?

Ask GW - it's unclear.
It always has been.

Your whole interpretation relies on you being able to declare what type of Unit a mixed unit is in, but here you can't?

 DarknessEternal wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:

The unit did run. The biker model did not.
Or are you trying to say the biker is not a member of the unit?

No, YOU are the one saying the biker is not a member of the unit. YOU said the unit ran, therefore the bike ran. But bikes can't run. Therefore you broke some rules along the way.

By your logic, if I move one model in a unit in the Movement phase, the unit moved and therefore every model moved. Which may have been true in previous editions, but not anymore.

 DarknessEternal wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:

The unit did run. The biker model did not.
Or are you trying to say the biker is not a member of the unit?

No, YOU are the one saying the biker is not a member of the unit. YOU said the unit ran, therefore the bike ran. But bikes can't run. Therefore you broke some rules along the way.

No, the unit ran. The bike didn't.
The unit moved. The heavy weapon model didn't. Does the heavy weapon model snap fire?
The unit fired assault weapons. The heavy weapon model didn't fire. Can the unit assault?

rigeld2 wrote:

They can be deployed together as one unit. So what's their unit type?

Ask GW - it's unclear.
It always has been.

Your whole interpretation relies on you being able to declare what type of Unit a mixed unit is in, but here you can't?

Correct - because there's literally no rules covering that. And it's not "my interpretation" it's how the rules work. And it's an issue in many cases, not just this one.

 Happyjew wrote:

 DarknessEternal wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:

The unit did run. The biker model did not.
Or are you trying to say the biker is not a member of the unit?

No, YOU are the one saying the biker is not a member of the unit. YOU said the unit ran, therefore the bike ran. But bikes can't run. Therefore you broke some rules along the way.

By your logic, if I move one model in a unit in the Movement phase, the unit moved and therefore every model moved. Which may have been true in previous editions, but not anymore.

Not so. The movement rules has rules governing moving by model in the movement phase. You don't even need a complex unit, some models can remain stationary for heavy weapons, for example.

Running, as defined by the rules, is done by whole units. Units cannot partially run with only some models. Every model in the unit is considered to run.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

rigeld2 wrote:

The unit moved. The heavy weapon model didn't. Does the heavy weapon model snap fire?
The unit fired assault weapons. The heavy weapon model didn't fire. Can the unit assault?
.

That's movement in the movement phase. Running has different rules.

When a unit runs, the whole unit runs. You can't run some models and shoot some models. The whole unit is considered running.

This is explicitly stated in the rules.

 Happyjew wrote:

 DarknessEternal wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:

The unit did run. The biker model did not.
Or are you trying to say the biker is not a member of the unit?

No, YOU are the one saying the biker is not a member of the unit. YOU said the unit ran, therefore the bike ran. But bikes can't run. Therefore you broke some rules along the way.

By your logic, if I move one model in a unit in the Movement phase, the unit moved and therefore every model moved. Which may have been true in previous editions, but not anymore.

While the whole unit has not moved, the whole unit is considered as having run. As bikes cannot run well, the unit could never run to begin with.

 DarknessEternal wrote:
Let's pretend for a minute that your assertions are true, and that a mixed unit of bikes and not bikes have the ability to run with only a subset of the models in the unit (non-bikes).

In a scenario, this subset runs. Now answer this question: Did the unit run?

If you answer yes, you have broken the rules. Units choose to run, but Bikes can't run.

If you answer no, then where did that extra movement in the shooting phase come from on some of the models.

The individual models capable of running ran. I already stated that the rules for Running don't take into account the existence of mixed units. They're quite brief, and they also don't make reference to the Advanced rules for different unit types.

In keeping with the general rules for movement, which state that different models within the same unit use their own movement modes where applicable (page 10), each model can use its own special movement in the shooting phase if it has one. The rules are not super-clear, here, but I don't see any explicit prohibition on units in a mixed unit running or turbo-boosting where appropriate. The rules are meant to represent fluff on the table, and if an interpretation results in a counter-intuitive, contra-fluff outcome (a mixed unit of bikes and cavalry actually moves more slowly than the models would apart), that interpretation would seem likely to be erroneous.

That leaves you in a situation where you have Bikes that count as having Run when Bikes are explicitly not capable of doing so.

Consider it counter-intuitive if you want, and potentially FAQable to be allowed, but it's breaking rules unequivocally right now

There's nothing else to say on this subject.

No, the bikes do not count as having run - no one is saying that.

rigeld2 wrote:
No, the bikes do not count as having run - no one is saying that.

Apart from the last line of the first paragraph for run. Which states a unit that has ran even if they didn't move count as having ran.

Yes, the unit counts as having run.
That does not require the jet bike to run.

Am I explaining this poorly?

You're just ignoring the rules that say bikes can't run, since you think they can.

rigeld2 wrote:
Yes, the unit counts as having run.
That does not require the jet bike to run.

Am I explaining this poorly?

So, lemme get this straight. The Jetbike is a part of the unit. The entire unit counts as having run. But the Jetbike is somehow not counted in being part of the unit since he didn't move?

Sounds fishy.

 DarknessEternal wrote:
You're just ignoring the rules that say bikes can't run, since you think they can.

That's not true. I'm ignoring nothing.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Goobi2 wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:
Yes, the unit counts as having run.
That does not require the jet bike to run.

Am I explaining this poorly?

So, lemme get this straight. The Jetbike is a part of the unit. The entire unit counts as having run. But the Jetbike is somehow not counted in being part of the unit since he didn't move?

Sounds fishy.

He's counted as being part of the unit - he must be because he's an IC.
The unit runs - this is allowed because the unit is Infantry, not Jetbikes.
The IC doesn't move because he's not allowed to run.

Here's the Running Rule:".....In their Shooting phase, units may choose to Run instead of firing...." pg. 14 BRB

Here's the TurboBoost Rule:" Bikes and Jetbikes canot Run, but can make a special Turbo-boost move, instead of firing in their Shooting phase..." pg. 45 BRB

So the crux of the question is, does a unit's Running mean that everyone in the unit can only Run, prohibiting other types of extra distance gaining in the Shooting phase? And furthermore, if the Unit runs, and someone in the unit cannot Run, then how can the Unit do any Shooting Phase Distance Gaining?

There is no clear specific answer; but I think it's slowed for anyone to play it such that a biker IC could not Turboboost whilst the dudes on foot Run, so long as Coherency is maintained. There are those who will quote Oh, this is a permissive rule-set, so if they don't specifically say you can, then you can't. Well, I have yet to find in the rulebook where it states anything about it being a permissive ruleset, much less defining what that means with respect to interpreting often poorly or half way play-tested rules.

Eldar Jetbikes can Turboboost 36", so I'm not sure why people would want to join those to Infantry, but I say go for it.

HIWPI
We play it how rigeld2 is arguing. But thats because of common sense that we use for some houserules we have.

RAW
Jetbikes cant run and therefore a unit that contains a jetbike cant run.

rigeld2 wrote:

 DarknessEternal wrote:
You're just ignoring the rules that say bikes can't run, since you think they can.

That's not true. I'm ignoring nothing.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Goobi2 wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:
Yes, the unit counts as having run.
That does not require the jet bike to run.

Am I explaining this poorly?

So, lemme get this straight. The Jetbike is a part of the unit. The entire unit counts as having run. But the Jetbike is somehow not counted in being part of the unit since he didn't move?

Sounds fishy.

He's counted as being part of the unit - he must be because he's an IC.
The unit runs - this is allowed because the unit is Infantry, not Jetbikes.
The IC doesn't move because he's not allowed to run.

You're ignoring part of "run" though.
Pg 14 BRB First paragraph, last sentence.
"but still count as having run"

Again in the second paragraph last sentence.

"Units that run"