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.

 lord_blackfang wrote:
Same here.
What's the point of looking for rules loopholes? GW doesn't hide easter eggs in the rules for the benefit of particularly creative readers. Your're not being a better player by abusing poor wording. If it's obviously an unintentional omission, treat it that way.

What if it's not a loophole?
What if it is actually intended?
What if they want to give those Marine-chapters a chance to get into CC?
Doesn't seem so obvious now.

No matter how hard you call it "abuse", it still doesn't beat cramming three Riptides in a list.
But you're not going to refuse to play those people, right?

Kangodo wrote:

 lord_blackfang wrote:
Same here.
What's the point of looking for rules loopholes? GW doesn't hide easter eggs in the rules for the benefit of particularly creative readers. Your're not being a better player by abusing poor wording. If it's obviously an unintentional omission, treat it that way.

What if it's not a loophole?
What if it is actually intended?
What if they want to give those Marine-chapters a chance to get into CC?
Doesn't seem so obvious now.

No matter how hard you call it "abuse", it still doesn't beat cramming three Riptides in a list.
But you're not going to refuse to play those people, right?

Or those that cram 5 into one

Wouldn't the termies be illegally deployed outside your deployment zone? What rule allows you to deploy a unit of termies outside your deployment zone?

RAW aside, the intention of the rules is likely that you can't assault. After all the work GW did to make first turn assaults impossible, it would be a very major oversight to allow something like this.

I'm sure it'll be declared bad soon enough.

In the meantime, Khan Raider list anyone? I have some friends I want to lose.

 Vector Strike wrote:

 Sothas wrote:
On a side note, some one asked about Raven Guard. There is no possible way to give scout to a Land Raider in a Raven Guard army. Trust me, a friend and I went unit by unit trying to figure out what Raven Guard actually does. The answer is close to nothing. Raven Guard is easily the worst Chapter Tactic IMHO.

And if you join an IC with the unit? i.e. a Captain with Assault Terminators, inside a Land Raider, before deploy. Wouldn't that give Scouts to the unit, therefore to the LR (as a DT to termies) - letting it make a Scout redeploy/outflank?

Saw such idea in another forum. But yeah, Khan letting DTs to get Scouts... man! If Shrike gave Infiltrate to Jump Units as an USR (instead to only a unit he joins), his expensive cost would be quite okay.

C:SM pg. 78 Strike from the Shadows: "Note that units that include models with the Bulky or Very Bulky special rules do not benefit from either rule."

The IC loses the benefit if he joins a termie squad. He cannot give it to the transport.

It's really amusing how people are crying foul over such a little gimmick.

Let me tell you how to counter it: Don't deploy anything valuable within charge range. 12" scout + 6" move +6" + 2d6" charge mean that they will at most be standing at the edge of your deployment zone before charging. Every heard of denied flank? Try that. Second best option would be putting something there that will crush terminators. Third best option is going first and making the entire gimmick inconsequential, because they can charge on player turn two anyways. Probably along with the entire rest of the whitescars army.

delete

Page 121 tells us that embarked units may deploy embarked upon transports (with restrictions for Dedicated Transports). The transport and the embarked unit deploy together.

Although it is never explicitly stated, there's no reason to believe that a redeployment is anything but what it says on the tin--a redeployment. As in you get to deploy the unit again. If a transport and the unit embarked upon it deploy together, then it stands to reason that a transport and the embarked unit redeploy together, too. Since the Scout special rule is what allows the redeployment in the first place, both units have made a Scout redeployment and the Terminators are not allowed a first turn charge.

rigeld2 wrote:

 Nem wrote:

A unit that deepstrikes via a mycetic spore...

....

The unit has still counts as deploying via deepstrike, even though the spore was utilising the deployment method, not the unit?

Because there's specific rules saying so. There's nothing like that for Scout.

You know, back the day when Drop Pods were a new thing, GW didn't explicitly state that embarked units count as arriving via Deep Strike. They mistakenly assumed that players would have enough common sense to know that. Of course it had to be FAQed, because some people think that GW hides easter eggs for them in the rules. They argued until they were blue in the face that the unit doesn't exist at all until it disembarks, and so did not arrive via Deep Strike, or some other nonsense. 10 years later it's the same old thing, people thinking they're clever for exploiting GW's tendency to write rules in a non-legalistic manner.

So what you are saying is that GW had to change the rules to stop them from doing something.
And now they need to do it again?

 lord_blackfang wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:

 Nem wrote:

A unit that deepstrikes via a mycetic spore...

....

The unit has still counts as deploying via deepstrike, even though the spore was utilising the deployment method, not the unit?

Because there's specific rules saying so. There's nothing like that for Scout.

You know, back the day when Drop Pods were a new thing, GW didn't explicitly state that embarked units count as arriving via Deep Strike. They mistakenly assumed that players would have enough common sense to know that. Of course it had to be FAQed, because some people think that GW hides easter eggs for them in the rules. They argued until they were blue in the face that the unit doesn't exist at all until it disembarks, and so did not arrive via Deep Strike, or some other nonsense. 10 years later it's the same old thing, people thinking they're clever for exploiting GW's tendency to write rules in a non-legalistic manner.

And on the other side are the people that think the rules are not something that is in the rules part of the rulebook but something that exists only in the heads of the developers.

rigeld2 wrote:

 fuusa wrote:
No-where, afaiaa, in the rules are we told that if a transport redeploys, the passengers have not.
If the passengers start demonstrably at location 1, then subsequently equally demonstrably end up at location 2, how did this happen?
Redeployment of them both.

The bolded is incorrect.
You re-deployed one. The fact that the other is embarked is irrelevant.

Eldrad can re-deploy vehicles as well. Have you argued in the past that embarked units count toward his limit? (If I'm remembering his rule correctly)

Yes, I certainly have as that was the RAW. You would have re-positioned 2 units.
Then along came this ...

Q. When Eldrad Ulthuan’s Divination is used to move a vehicle with
an embarked unit onboard, does this count as having moved two units
or just one? (p50)
A. One. Embarked units do not count towards the Divination
total.

... which is no-longer relevant, its about divination which no-longer exists.
It may well turn out to be precedent, but until the entirely random process of faq writing is done, its unimportant.
For rules discussion, there is only RAW at the moment, no errata and no faq (which is gw house rules).

Another thing of concern, is the different wording from old to new dex, old being "reposition" while new being "redeploy."
If you look to reserves and how they work to support your argument, you would be using units that have not deployed and comparing them to units that have, then re-deployed.

To make my stance clear, this may well be faqued as being ok, but, atm, RAW says no, as it did in the past, with eldrad (which is how I played it with my eldar, pre faq).


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 lord_blackfang wrote:

You know, back the day when Drop Pods were a new thing, GW didn't explicitly state that embarked units count as arriving via Deep Strike. They mistakenly assumed that players would have enough common sense to know that. Of course it had to be FAQed, because some people think that GW hides easter eggs for them in the rules. They argued until they were blue in the face that the unit doesn't exist at all until it disembarks, and so did not arrive via Deep Strike, or some other nonsense. 10 years later it's the same old thing, people thinking they're clever for exploiting GW's tendency to write rules in a non-legalistic manner.

Bloody hell, someone who remembers that!!!
You may remember my lone crusade against that on warseer (where I am Jubilex)?

Just do it the old fasioned way...deploy the LR sideways right at the 12" mark. Pivot giving you a quick 3" headstart, move 6" (total 9' distance) disembark 6" (15" total).
If he stayed at his 12" mark (didn't move forward) you need a 9 on 2 dice to get him. If he did move up 6" to shoot you, you now only need a 3 on 2 dice.

Ok so none of you read the rule or didn't read it correctly.

"If Khan is your Warlord, friendly models
with the Chapter Tactics (White Scars) special rule that are
Bikes or have Dedicated Transports have the Scout special rule"

Key words being "that are Bikes or have Dedicated Transports"

The terminators have scout thus conferring it to the land raider. I wanted to do this same thing but saw the problem almost right away.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Also this treats the unit type as the vehicle for redeployment distance still giving you the 12"

So part of the argument can also be applied to scouts inside their land speeder storms, because those are dedicated transports and it has scout. It doesn't need to be white scars to try and do this assault turn1 thing.

You could always scout, give them first turn, and then charge in yours.

 Mulletdude wrote:
So part of the argument can also be applied to scouts inside their land speeder storms, because those are dedicated transports and it has scout. It doesn't need to be white scars to try and do this assault turn1 thing.

A: Read my post as there is nothing to argue here (the rule is clear and people did not read it correctly)

B: A land speeder storm isn't an assault vehicle.

C: Why would you assault with scouts?

 aidobmac wrote:
How does being in the vehicle that made the scout move count as the embarked unit making the scout move.

(I'm not trying to be a pain i just want something i can go from, so thanks for the responses thus far! )

Did the terminators not move during the scout move? When a vehicle moves, the embarked passengers count as having moved as well.

 augustus5 wrote:

 aidobmac wrote:
How does being in the vehicle that made the scout move count as the embarked unit making the scout move.

(I'm not trying to be a pain i just want something i can go from, so thanks for the responses thus far! )

Did the terminators not move during the scout move? When a vehicle moves, the embarked passengers count as having moved as well.

Is nobody reading the other comments? THE TERMINATORS HAVE SCOUT , CONFERRING IT TO THE LAND RAIDER

Also it is a redeploy . It's not a move.

 Talfrost wrote:
B: A land speeder storm isn't an assault vehicle. .

Correct me if I'm wrong, isn't the LSS an Open-topped vehicle?

 Happyjew wrote:

 Talfrost wrote:
B: A land speeder storm isn't an assault vehicle. .

Correct me if I'm wrong, isn't the LSS an Open-topped vehicle?

Sorry you are right but they still need to scout move to get the distance for a turn one assault. So it still wouldn't work.

 Jidmah wrote:
It's really amusing how people are crying foul over such a little gimmick.

Let me tell you how to counter it: Don't deploy anything valuable within charge range. 12" scout + 6" move +6" + 2d6" charge mean that they will at most be standing at the edge of your deployment zone before charging. Every heard of denied flank? Try that. Second best option would be putting something there that will crush terminators. Third best option is going first and making the entire gimmick inconsequential, because they can charge on player turn two anyways. Probably along with the entire rest of the whitescars army.

Some things can redeploy with Scout 12" can't they? I'm not sure if the Land Raider is one of these though. Can anybody confirm this?

 DarthOvious wrote:

 Jidmah wrote:
It's really amusing how people are crying foul over such a little gimmick.

Let me tell you how to counter it: Don't deploy anything valuable within charge range. 12" scout + 6" move +6" + 2d6" charge mean that they will at most be standing at the edge of your deployment zone before charging. Every heard of denied flank? Try that. Second best option would be putting something there that will crush terminators. Third best option is going first and making the entire gimmick inconsequential, because they can charge on player turn two anyways. Probably along with the entire rest of the whitescars army.

Some things can redeploy with Scout 12" can't they? I'm not sure if the Land Raider is one of these though. Can anybody confirm this?

Infantry, Artillery, Walkers and Monstrous creatures redeploy 6". Everything else redeploys 12 inches.

RAW - I think it works right now for all of the reasons already given.

HIWPI/RAI - Personally I think it was an oversight as every other standard (meaning from the BRB) form of modified deployment counts both the DT and the unit as utilizing the rule (thus denying the ability to assault). Unfortunately, we can't know for sure. I wouldn't use it, but I wouldn't stop an opponent from using it...although I might give them a little grief over it

 Talfrost wrote:
Ok so none of you read the rule or didn't read it correctly.

"If Khan is your Warlord, friendly models
with the Chapter Tactics (White Scars) special rule that are
Bikes or have Dedicated Transports have the Scout special rule"

Key words being "that are Bikes or have Dedicated Transports"

The terminators have scout thus conferring it to the land raider. I wanted to do this same thing but saw the problem almost right away.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Also this treats the unit type as the vehicle for redeployment distance still giving you the 12"

I do not see how it matters how the land raider got scout. The point is that it has scout, and can thus make the scout redeploy, which people are saying does not equate to the terminators themselves redeploying. You have not addressed the latter.

 Talfrost wrote:

 Happyjew wrote:

 Talfrost wrote:
B: A land speeder storm isn't an assault vehicle. .

Correct me if I'm wrong, isn't the LSS an Open-topped vehicle?

Sorry you are right but they still need to scout move to get the distance for a turn one assault. So it still wouldn't work.

Why wouldn't it work? Your previous argument was based off of the Terminators giving the LR scout being the part that dissallowed the charge, I was under the impression (I cannot double check currently, so please correct me if I am wrong) that a LSS has scout as one of its special rules, thus it is not being conferred by the scout squad, which counters your argument as far as I can tell.

The Land Speeder Storm would be a completely separate issue from the Khan Terminators. But I'm inclined to say that dudes inside a Transport that has the Scout USR makes the passengers Scout too. Otherwise they should not be legally permitted to redeploy at all, as the Scouts themselves do not have Scout, or else we wouldn't be discussing it right?

Sure passengers can deploy in their dedicated transports, but permitting them to REDEPLOY in their transports is not the same as just deploying. So if they can stay on board, the passengers must be Scouting. Or if they are not, they must stay behind in the deployment zone.

The Terminators themselves get Scout, because they have selected a Dedicated Transport (a Land Raider), and thus if they deploy within the Land Raider get to Scout Redeploy. I'm very happy the actual rule was reposted in HUGE bold font. Thank you for that!

 Lord Krungharr wrote:
Or if they are not, they must stay behind in the deployment zone.

I start a unit embarked on a Transport that has Scout (however it gets it). The embarked unit does not have Scout.
I use the Scout move to redeploy the Transport. According to you, the embarked unit must be left behind.
This would be redeploying the unit. The embarked unit does not have Scout and is not permitted to redeploy. Please explain how to resolve this issue.

rigeld2 wrote:

 Lord Krungharr wrote:
Or if they are not, they must stay behind in the deployment zone.

I start a unit embarked on a Transport that has Scout (however it gets it). The embarked unit does not have Scout.
I use the Scout move to redeploy the Transport. According to you, the embarked unit must be left behind.
This would be redeploying the unit. The embarked unit does not have Scout and is not permitted to redeploy. Please explain how to resolve this issue.

Simple resolution, the passengers, while embarked, make the scout redeployment with the vehicle.

 DeathReaper wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:

 Lord Krungharr wrote:
Or if they are not, they must stay behind in the deployment zone.

I start a unit embarked on a Transport that has Scout (however it gets it). The embarked unit does not have Scout.
I use the Scout move to redeploy the Transport. According to you, the embarked unit must be left behind.
This would be redeploying the unit. The embarked unit does not have Scout and is not permitted to redeploy. Please explain how to resolve this issue.

Simple resolution, the passengers, while embarked, make the scout redeployment with the vehicle.

That wasn't his assertion. I'd like something to back up the assertion he made, not something that ignores it.

White Scars terminators have the scout USR. They bestow it on their land raider. Land raider redeploys 12" before the game.

Game starts and you have terminators with the scout USR who have redeployed outside their DZ. No assault during the first player turn by this unit.

To claim that a unit with the scout USR granting it to their dedicated transport, which then scouts, and then try to assault claiming that the transport scouted but the unit did not, is about as rules lawyering/easter egging as possible IMO.