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.

 Abandon wrote:
I see claims but no proof.

1 Beast model embarked is most definitely in excess of one infantry unit, as you may not have beasts embarked therefore if you were to have an infantry unit embarked the transport would then contain one beasts and one infantry unit and that is most definitely in excess of a single infantry unit as the transport would have a unit of beasts and a unit of infantry embarked.

This part makes no sense at all.

Now I see why you are confused, It does not seem like you fully grasp the concept of a Permissive ruleset.

There is a limit for beasts. That limit is zero as we have no permission at all for beasts to be embarked. Therefore no beasts may be embarked.

 Abandon wrote:
I have show such permission, you just refuse to see it. You are permitted to follow the rules to their natural conclusion or the game breaks completely at every step.

Infantry is permitted to imbark.
Embarked infantry is permitted to turn into beasts.
You now have legally and with permission reached a state of 'embarked beasts'.

That does not give permission for the beasts to be embarked though. That does not say that beasts may be embarked on a transport. that is just a rule that changes a unit of infantry to beasts no matter where they are.

Please cite an actual rule allowing beasts to be embarked on a transport because I can not find one. If you can not find a rule that says beasts may be embarked then they may not be embarked.

 DeathReaper wrote:

 Abandon wrote:
I see claims but no proof.

1 Beast model embarked is most definitely in excess of one infantry unit, as you may not have beasts embarked therefore if you were to have an infantry unit embarked the transport would then contain one beasts and one infantry unit and that is most definitely in excess of a single infantry unit as the transport would have a unit of beasts and a unit of infantry embarked.

This part makes no sense at all.

Now I see why you are confused, It does not seem like you fully grasp the concept of a Permissive ruleset.

There is a limit for beasts. That limit is zero as we have no permission at all for beasts to be embarked. Therefore no beasts may be embarked.

 Abandon wrote:
I have show such permission, you just refuse to see it. You are permitted to follow the rules to their natural conclusion or the game breaks completely at every step.

Infantry is permitted to imbark.
Embarked infantry is permitted to turn into beasts.
You now have legally and with permission reached a state of 'embarked beasts'.

That does not give permission for the beasts to be embarked though. That does not say that beasts may be embarked on a transport. that is just a rule that changes a unit of infantry to beasts no matter where they are.

Please cite an actual rule allowing beasts to be embarked on a transport because I can not find one. If you can not find a rule that says beasts may be embarked then they may not be embarked.

So... you're saying that if you follow the rules and they lead you to a state, that state is illegal unless specifically and directly permitted? Is that really what you are saying? ...because that is exactly the argument you are presenting. Essentially that following the rules is not permitted unless it's specifically permitted.

...that is just a rule that changes a unit of infantry to beasts no matter where they are.

Oh is that all? You mean just a rule that can change them into beasts while they are embarked? How could that possibly mean they can be beasts and embarked at the same time? hmmm(sarcasm)

I am saying that the rules as written cause an illegal state when the posessed are embarked upon a transport. This is demonstrably true.

The rule does not just change them to beasts while embarked. it can happen when they are not embarked as well...

 DeathReaper wrote:
I am saying that the rules as written cause an illegal state when the posessed are embarked upon a transport. This is demonstrably true.

The rule does not just change them to beasts while embarked. it can happen when they are not embarked as well...

So the state was reached legally. As in, with permission. Yes?
...but that the state is not permitted?
Lack of permission and denial of permission are not quite the same.

I think you're trying to say that the permission is denied by the capacity rule as opposed to a denial of the state due to pure lack of permission for it at all. Yes?

 DeathReaper wrote:

 Abandon wrote:
I see claims but no proof.

1 Beast model embarked is most definitely in excess of one infantry unit, as you may not have beasts embarked therefore if you were to have an infantry unit embarked the transport would then contain one beasts and one infantry unit and that is most definitely in excess of a single infantry unit as the transport would have a unit of beasts and a unit of infantry embarked.

This part makes no sense at all.

Now I see why you are confused, It does not seem like you fully grasp the concept of a Permissive ruleset.

There is a limit for beasts. That limit is zero as we have no permission at all for beasts to be embarked. Therefore no beasts may be embarked.

 Abandon wrote:
I have show such permission, you just refuse to see it. You are permitted to follow the rules to their natural conclusion or the game breaks completely at every step.

Infantry is permitted to imbark.
Embarked infantry is permitted to turn into beasts.
You now have legally and with permission reached a state of 'embarked beasts'.

That does not give permission for the beasts to be embarked though. That does not say that beasts may be embarked on a transport. that is just a rule that changes a unit of infantry to beasts no matter where they are.

Please cite an actual rule allowing beasts to be embarked on a transport because I can not find one. If you can not find a rule that says beasts may be embarked then they may not be embarked.

By that theory, you also do not have permission to immediately disembark beasts from a transport vehicle.

JBrehaut wrote:
By that theory, you also do not have permission to immediately disembark beasts from a transport vehicle.

I never said you had permission to immediately disembark beasts from a transport vehicle, not by the RAW.

I said the rule creates an illegal situation and the game breaks because we are not told how to handle said situation.

So where is the denial of that state?

This rule "Each Transport vehicle has a maximum passenger capacity that can never be exceeded. A Transport can carry a single Infantry unit...'
Does not say what you seem to think it says.

It says 'a maximum passenger capacity that can never be exceeded'.
-Ok there's some limit to how much it can carry and you can't go over that, got it.
Then is says ' A Transport can carry a single Infantry unit...'
- This is permission to carry one single infantry unit, got it... wait is that the maximum capacity limit?

So at most, one unit of infantry with X models. The thing is there's no denial here as no limit value is actually set and no comparative values are given so there is no way to compare a unit of anything else to a unit of infantry. Not having a place on the capacity scale does not mean their capacity limit is zero, that's an assumption. What it means is they're not on the capacity scale and therefore cannot count towards the capacity limit.

So how does one unit of beasts exceed one unit of infantry in the rules? Please direct me to where the comparative values are listed. Oh there not there...

My garage has a maximum capacity limit that cannot be exceeded. My garage can hold two cars. Are boxes denied existence in my garage by those rules? No. I said there was a limit and then I said how many cars will fit in it. That says nothing about anything but cars so there is no denial for anything except cars. If other rules put other things in there there's no limit on them unless they set there own limit or give it a value relative to a car.

"Each Transport vehicle has a maximum passenger capacity that can never be exceeded. A Transport can carry a single Infantry unit..." Are beasts denied being embarked by these rules? No, see above.

 Abandon wrote:
So where is the denial of that state?

This rule "Each Transport vehicle has a maximum passenger capacity that can never be exceeded. A Transport can carry a single Infantry unit...'
Does not say what you seem to think it says.

This says that a transport can carry infantry. I still have not seen a rule taht states that a transport can carry beasts...

It says 'a maximum passenger capacity that can never be exceeded'.
-Ok there's some limit to how much it can carry and you can't go over that, got it.
Then is says ' A Transport can carry a single Infantry unit...'
- This is permission to carry one single infantry unit, got it... wait is that the maximum capacity limit?

So at most, one unit of infantry with X models. The thing is there's no denial here as no limit value is actually set and no comparative values are given so there is no way to compare a unit of anything else to a unit of infantry. Not having a place on the capacity scale does not mean their capacity limit is zero, that's an assumption. What it means is they're not on the capacity scale and therefore cannot count towards the capacity limit.

there is no way to compare a unit to infantry because it is not needed, unit types, other than infantry, can not be embarked. it is that simple.

So how does one unit of beasts exceed one unit of infantry in the rules? Please direct me to where the comparative values are listed. Oh there not there...

They exceed the transports capacity by virtue of no rule stating that they are allowed to be embarked. You still have not found a rule quote that says that Beasts can be embarked have you?

My garage has a maximum capacity limit that cannot be exceeded. My garage can hold two cars. Are boxes denied existence in my garage by those rules? No.

Under a permissive ruleset, yes, if only cars are allowed in the garage you may not put boxes in the garage...

I said there was a limit and then I said how many cars will fit in it. That says nothing about anything but cars so there is no denial for anything except cars. If other rules put other things in there there's no limit on them unless they set there own limit or give it a value relative to a car.

there is a limit to other things, the limit is zero as other things are not given permission to be in the garage in the first place.

"Each Transport vehicle has a maximum passenger capacity that can never be exceeded. A Transport can carry a single Infantry unit..." Are beasts denied being embarked by these rules? No, see above.

No, they are denied being embarked by virtue of not having a rule allowing beasts to be embarked.

That rule limits the total capacity of the transport. Any model which does not fit into that capacity is in excess of that capacity.

Transports can only carry infantry and, unless otherwise noted, nothing else...

Dr - no, that rule does not say what you think it states.

It states you have a maximum transport capacity that cannot be exceeded - which is the number of models listed by the the transport entry, eg ten models for a rhino. This is an allowance for any number of units to be in there, as long as you do not exceed the transport capacity.

There is then a restriction stating only one uni t of infantry can b on board - restricting the former permission to have any models embarked that you like, up to the transport capacity.

You then have further rules only allowing infantry to embark, reducing further the ability to have non infantry to get inside the vehicle.

However, the models are already embarked. They do not exceed the transport capacity - ten models - and are not an infantry unit, so the restriction in the second setntence does not ally.

RAW the beasts can stay embarked, as long as they do not exceed the transport capacity of ten models for a rhino. This would be the case if they changed to eg bulky and already have six plus models, but they do not change to bulky

nosferatu1001 wrote:
Dr - no, that rule does not say what you think it states.

It states you have a maximum transport capacity that cannot be exceeded - which is the number of models listed by the the transport entry, eg ten models for a rhino. This is an allowance for any number of units to be in there, as long as you do not exceed the transport capacity.

There is then a restriction stating only one uni t of infantry can b on board - restricting the former permission to have any models embarked that you like, up to the transport capacity.

You then have further rules only allowing infantry to embark, reducing further the ability to have non infantry to get inside the vehicle.

However, the models are already embarked. They do not exceed the transport capacity - ten models - and are not an infantry unit, so the restriction in the second setntence does not ally.

RAW the beasts can stay embarked, as long as they do not exceed the transport capacity of ten models for a rhino. This would be the case if they changed to eg bulky and already have six plus models, but they do not change to bulky

Your version of RAW is not correct at all, unless you have a rule stating that beasts may be embarked. Citation needed.

The rule limits the total capacity of the transport. Any model which does not fit into that capacity is in excess of that capacity. It really is that simple.

I already laid out your error. You have permission to not exceed the transport capacity - 10 models say - and then a restriction on infantry such that only one unit may be embarked


Find a restriction on the general permission for ANY models to be embarked as long as you a) do not exceed the capacity Nd b) do not have more than one infantry unit embarked.

Citation needed. After all, I have just proven you are reading two sentences as applying to each other, when they do not. One is permission one is restriction

nosferatu1001 wrote:
Find a restriction on the general permission for ANY models to be embarked

Better yet, find me this permission.

DR - the unit capacity thing: If I have a box, that can hold a maximum of one dog, and I put a brick in it, have I exceeded its capacity?

Tactical_Genius wrote:
DR - the unit capacity thing: If I have a box, that can hold a maximum of one dog, and I put a brick in it, have I exceeded its capacity?

Does the brick have permission to be placed in the box?

 Happyjew wrote:

Tactical_Genius wrote:
DR - the unit capacity thing: If I have a box, that can hold a maximum of one dog, and I put a brick in it, have I exceeded its capacity?

Does the brick have permission to be placed in the box?

If I put my dog in the box, and the dog turns into a brick, yes. But I was trying to address that specific issue.

Tactical_Genius wrote:

 Happyjew wrote:

Tactical_Genius wrote:
DR - the unit capacity thing: If I have a box, that can hold a maximum of one dog, and I put a brick in it, have I exceeded its capacity?

Does the brick have permission to be placed in the box?

If I put my dog in the box, and the dog turns into a brick, yes. But I was trying to address that specific issue.

To be fair, I have no part in this argument. I've lost track after about the third post. Near as I can tell one side says "You can't be in there because "X"" and the game breaks. The other side says "You can be in there because "X"" and the game doesn't break.

 DeathReaper wrote:

nosferatu1001 wrote:
Find a restriction on the general permission for ANY models to be embarked

Better yet, find me this permission.

I did. The first sentence, which states the maximum capacity. You are then told what a vehicles transport capacity is.

Permission found. Your concession is accepted.

Tactical_Genius wrote:
DR - the unit capacity thing: If I have a box, that can hold a maximum of one dog, and I put a brick in it, have I exceeded its capacity?

Yes, as the brick is not allowed to be there, via the permissive ruleset.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

nosferatu1001 wrote:

 DeathReaper wrote:

nosferatu1001 wrote:
Find a restriction on the general permission for ANY models to be embarked

Better yet, find me this permission.

I did. The first sentence, which states the maximum capacity. You are then told what a vehicles transport capacity is.

Permission found. Your concession is accepted.

That line does not say what you think it says.

The maximum capacity is 10 infantry models.

We know this from the context, as only infantry can be embarked.

Your concession is accepted since you can not find anything that states beasts can be embarked.

DR, we have show permission several times. It's easy as we simply follow the rules to get there but you refuse to admit that following the rules is permitted.

We have pointed out your misreading of the capacity rules several times but you refuse to acknowledge that as well.

As you have also demonstrated an almost complete inability to admit to a mistake I can only assume this is again the case. No amount of reason or logic will sway you. You are not constructively debating the rules. You are in essence, merely stating the same thing over and over despite your claims being dis-proven several times by several people. I believe we are finished here and you have lost whether you want to admit it or not.

 Abandon wrote:
DR, we have show permission several times.

Please quote the post where you found the rule that stated that beasts may be embarked on a transport, because I must have missed it.

 Abandon wrote:
We have pointed out your misreading of the capacity rules several times but you refuse to acknowledge that as well

I have not misread anything.

By the nature of a permissive ruleset you need to have a rule that states you can have beasts embarked. Have you found this rule somewhere?

Yes, we found this rule. Thank you for conceding the argument again, as you are reiterating the disproven point.

The vehicle has a maximum capacity that cannot be exceeded. This is permission for any type of models to be embarked, as long as they do not exceed the capacity, in this case 10 models.

There is a restriction that, at any point, only one infantry unit may be embarked. This is a restriction on the general permission to fill a vehicle up to its maximum capacity.

Your "in context we know that" is your unsupported leap, proving you have no rules basis. Do not repeat it as fact.

"We know this from the context, as only infantry can be embarked. "

This is a lie.

DR - can you find the rule that allows a space marine captain to join a unit of tactical marines? (bear with me here)

Tactical_Genius wrote:
DR - can you find the rule that allows a space marine captain to join a unit of tactical marines? (bear with me here)

Youre going with general vs specific permissions, which is the point Im making to DR

DR is reading the first sentence, which is permission for anything to be embarked as long as it does not exceed the vehicles capacity, as being contingent upon the second, separate sentence whcih limits the first permission to only evetr alllow a single INFANTRY unit to be embarked.

Of course, that is a misreading - the second does not override the first in general, nor does it state that "ONLY" infantry units may be embarked, as DR claims quite a few times. It simply places a limit on infantry units. It doe snot place limits on everyone else.

its like being told you need specific permission to deploy in a ruin, when told you can deploy anywhere on the table

nosferatu1001 wrote:

Tactical_Genius wrote:
DR - can you find the rule that allows a space marine captain to join a unit of tactical marines? (bear with me here)

Youre going with general vs specific permissions, which is the point Im making to DR

DR is reading the first sentence, which is permission for anything to be embarked as long as it does not exceed the vehicles capacity, as being contingent upon the second, separate sentence whcih limits the first permission to only evetr alllow a single INFANTRY unit to be embarked.

Of course, that is a misreading - the second does not override the first in general, nor does it state that "ONLY" infantry units may be embarked, as DR claims quite a few times. It simply places a limit on infantry units. It doe snot place limits on everyone else.

its like being told you need specific permission to deploy in a ruin, when told you can deploy anywhere on the table

I know, I'm attempting to lead DR to the same conclusion.

nosferatu1001 wrote:
Yes, we found this rule. Thank you for conceding the argument again, as you are reiterating the disproven point.

You still have not posted said rule, please do, and highlight the rule in question via an underscore please so I am sure to not miss what you are referring to.

The vehicle has a maximum capacity that cannot be exceeded.

Well you got this correct, almost.

"Each Transport vehicle has a maximum passenger capacity that can never be exceeded" (78)

This is permission for any type of models to be embarked, as long as they do not exceed the capacity, in this case 10 models.

No it is not, as only infantry can be embarked as per the context of the embarking rules. Please try again.

There is a restriction that, at any point, only one infantry unit may be embarked. This is a restriction on the general permission to fill a vehicle up to its maximum capacity.

And only one infantry is allowed on the transport Beasts are not infantry and are not allowed there as a single infantry unit is the only unit type allowed by the rules to be embarked..

Your "in context we know that" is your unsupported leap, proving you have no rules basis. Do not repeat it as fact.

It is supported, as no one has produced rules that say that beasts can be embarked.

"We know this from the context, as only infantry can be embarked. "

This is a lie.

The prove that this is a lie, you still have not shown any rules that say that beasts can be embarked. I am still waiting for you to produce something that tells us that beasts can be embarked.

"A Transport can carry a single Infantry unit and/or any number of Independent Characters (as long as they are also Infantry), up to a total number of models equal to the vehicle's Transport Capacity. " (78)

Here is what a transport is allowed to carry, a single Infantry unit and/or any number of Independent Characters.

Where is the allowance for beasts to be carried?

You have not shown this, so I will accept that the rule does not exist and you can not prove that beasts can be carried as there is no allowance whatsoever to carry beasts.

DR - You have not answered my question.

Tactical_Genius wrote:
DR - You have not answered my question.

The IC rule covers this.

 DeathReaper wrote:

Tactical_Genius wrote:
DR - You have not answered my question.

The IC rule covers this.

Ok, so there is no specific rule that tells me that it can happen? I have to infer it from the fact that the captain is an IC?

Tactical_Genius wrote:

 DeathReaper wrote:

Tactical_Genius wrote:
DR - You have not answered my question.

The IC rule covers this.

Ok, so there is no specific rule that tells me that it can happen? I have to infer it from the fact that the captain is an IC?

There is a rule that tells you that an IC can join another unit...

The base IC rule covers it explicitly.

 DeathReaper wrote:

Tactical_Genius wrote:

 DeathReaper wrote:

Tactical_Genius wrote:
DR - You have not answered my question.

The IC rule covers this.

Ok, so there is no specific rule that tells me that it can happen? I have to infer it from the fact that the captain is an IC?

There is a rule that tells you that an IC can join another unit...

The base IC rule covers it explicitly.

Ok, but you have no rule that *specifically* says that a space marine captain can join a unit of marines (specifically).