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.

Hey all, Necron question here this time. My local Necron player found a this on a youtube video called the "Cheese Report". Basically he's stating that if a Ghost Ark that was purchased as a DT for a unit of Necron warriors is destroyed, that another Ghost Ark could use the repair barge USR and fix it. I can't for the life of me find this video and frankly I'm done looking at Necron stuff for the minute. So the logic he's using is thus.

Repair Barge: Nominate a unit of necron warriors with 6" and roll...add D3 models to the unit. Because it says models and not warriors, he takes this to mean that he can add anything that was attached to the unit. He says this works with lords and cryptecs and anything you can add to a unit.

My argument is that vehicles aren't apart of the unit and even if they were, they no longer are once they are destroyed. I checked the FAQ and the codex and now I need Dakka's help here. Please tell me this already annoyingly powerful codex isn't getting stronger. Thanks for reading.

You're quite right, the transport (even a dedicated transport) is in no way part of the same unit.

Can I get a pg reference? For whatever reason the "I saw it on the internet" arguement only works for the other guys, not me.

Crazy Jay wrote:
Hey all, Necron question here this time. My local Necron player found a this on a youtube video called the "Cheese Report". Basically he's stating that if a Ghost Ark that was purchased as a DT for a unit of Necron warriors is destroyed, that another Ghost Ark could use the repair barge USR and fix it. I can't for the life of me find this video and frankly I'm done looking at Necron stuff for the minute. So the logic he's using is thus.

Repair Barge: Nominate a unit of necron warriors with 6" and roll...add D3 models to the unit. Because it says models and not warriors, he takes this to mean that he can add anything that was attached to the unit. He says this works with lords and cryptecs and anything you can add to a unit.

My argument is that vehicles aren't apart of the unit and even if they were, they no longer are once they are destroyed. I checked the FAQ and the codex and now I need Dakka's help here. Please tell me this already annoyingly powerful codex isn't getting stronger. Thanks for reading.

He's wrong. It's D3 warrior models. Ghost Arks are not attached to the unit anyway.

GW has this strange idea that the players aren't...how can I put this nicely...munchkins. Now I'm not saying that everyone who plays is a munchkin. As such they write rules assuming that people will understand the context. So, RAW, any model can be added to the unit. A Necron player wants to add D3 Baneblades, he can. He can also create more barges, however, they would have to be a full member of the unit, meaning the squad would not be able to embark, they would all have to shoot at the same target, etc.

That being said, it is clearly not the intent, which would be for Warriors only, and some people would recommend you grab your hard copy of the BRB, and slap him upside the head with it. Which of course will lead to assault charges and the loss of a friend.

 Happyjew wrote:
GW has this strange idea that the players aren't...how can I put this nicely...munchkins. Now I'm not saying that everyone who plays is a munchkin. As such they write rules assuming that people will understand the context. So, RAW, any model can be added to the unit. A Necron player wants to add D3 Baneblades, he can. He can also create more barges, however, they would have to be a full member of the unit, meaning the squad would not be able to embark, they would all have to shoot at the same target, etc.

That being said, it is clearly not the intent, which would be for Warriors only, and some people would recommend you grab your hard copy of the BRB, and slap him upside the head with it. Which of course will lead to assault charges and the loss of a friend.

^^ LOL

Some people really go out of their way to try and ruin the game, thats a first Ive heard of this HAHA

 Happyjew wrote:
GW has this strange idea that the players aren't...how can I put this nicely...munchkins. Now I'm not saying that everyone who plays is a munchkin. As such they write rules assuming that people will understand the context. So, RAW, any model can be added to the unit. A Necron player wants to add D3 Baneblades, he can. He can also create more barges, however, they would have to be a full member of the unit, meaning the squad would not be able to embark, they would all have to shoot at the same target, etc.

That being said, it is clearly not the intent, which would be for Warriors only, and some people would recommend you grab your hard copy of the BRB, and slap him upside the head with it. Which of course will lead to assault charges and the loss of a friend.

Ai, one of the greatest problems GW has when it comes to writing rules is that they make the assumption that your average person is capable of common sense and fair play.
Which is why they didn't see the problem of introducing Serpent Shields, army wide ignore cover and pyrovore bombs.

Happyjew wrote:GW has this strange idea that the players aren't...how can I put this nicely...munchkins. Now I'm not saying that everyone who plays is a munchkin. As such they write rules assuming that people will understand the context. So, RAW, any model can be added to the unit. A Necron player wants to add D3 Baneblades, he can. He can also create more barges, however, they would have to be a full member of the unit, meaning the squad would not be able to embark, they would all have to shoot at the same target, etc.

That being said, it is clearly not the intent, which would be for Warriors only, and some people would recommend you grab your hard copy of the BRB, and slap him upside the head with it. Which of course will lead to assault charges and the loss of a friend.

It's okay, if they're not Orks, they don't have Fleet (of something) or they've already called a WAAGH! they could fail...
OP could just hide in difficult terrain, most people fail that over a large distance.


On topic though, it's D3 Necron Warriors only and any Ghost Ark can attempt to do it to any Warrior squad (all of them could do it to the same one if they wanted).

Thanks for all the responses. 2 things I was looking for was 1) can vehicles join an infantry unit. 2) what happens to a vehicle after it's destroyed. The first is inconclusive. It doesn't state either way and only IC addresses this. The second is more clear, whether it's wrecked or explodes it becomes terrain. Using his logic of "if it doesn't say you can't, you can" I should start equipping avenger mega bolters on all of my marines. That's a good deal since it's a free upgrade.

Crazy Jay wrote:
Thanks for all the responses. 2 things I was looking for was 1) can vehicles join an infantry unit. 2) what happens to a vehicle after it's destroyed. The first is inconclusive. It doesn't state either way and only IC addresses this. The second is more clear, whether it's wrecked or explodes it becomes terrain. Using his logic of "if it doesn't say you can't, you can" I should start equipping avenger mega bolters on all of my marines. That's a good deal since it's a free upgrade.

1) No. Only an IC has permission to join a unit.

Pfft.
If you're going to use his logic, take Ironclads in squadrons of up to 10 as troop choices with Quantum shielding and 2 Grav-cannons and grav amps per model.

AV 15 on front and side.

On a serious note, you do realise that you need permission in a permissive rule set, right?

Yes, I do realize that. I was just being snarky at the end of my last post. I know the AMB isn't the end all be all, it was just the first thing that came to mind.

The other related argument I've heard is bringing Crypteks and Lords back into the unit... (which I also disagree with)

Obviously not.

Add D3 models to the Warrior unit.

What can be a part of a Warrior unit? Necron Warriors.

And they may have a dedicated transport, ut a transport is never a part of the unit.

So the only thing that can be added to the Warriors is... Warriors.

Baktru wrote:
So the only thing that can be added to the Warriors BY THE REPAIR BARGE FUNCTION is... Warriors.

Fixed that for you.
(clarification is important, otherwise idiots can claim things like, "You can't attach Lords and Crypteks to units of Warriors! I saw a thing on the internet! You can only add Warriors to Warriors!")

Odd, as crypteks and lords can also be part of the warrior unit. So no, you are told you can add models. Technically any model fills this criteria. Meaning you coukd add d3 warlord titans.

Well yes, that is what I meant and is indeed clearer

I must say, this game breaks pretty quickly if you play 100% raw.

 BrotherHaraldus wrote:
I must say, this game breaks pretty quickly if you play 100% raw.

Usually in my first Shooting Phase yes..

I don't see why you can't bring royal court back as they become the upgrade character to the unit just like a sarg. They are then scoring. They become part of the warrior unit of all purposes.

 Mythra wrote:
I don't see why you can't bring royal court back as they become the upgrade character to the unit just like a sarg. They are then scoring. They become part of the warrior unit of all purposes.

You can, is the short answer

The long answer is the most common compromise I have seen is that this rue only allows you to bring back models that were a part of the unit, like RC / warriors, but not add new models such as Monoliths or Imperator titans.

Guys, why can't we all just play RAI?
;_;

Because RAI differs wildly?

Some people think it can only return warriors as the RAI
Some think it is any model attached tot eh unit "permanently", like RC members
Some think it is any model that was attachd - so a downed overlord could be repaired

Which f those is RAI?

It is blatantly obvious the thing is only meant to be able to bring back Warriors.
People who think being able to re-add 150 points worth of ResOrb/Phase Shifter/Warscythe/Mindshackle Scarab/Sempiternal Weave carrying Lord is what the Repair Barge function of the Ghost Ark is meant to be used for are not playing RAI. They are trying to find a RAW loophole they can exploit.
(no doubt the same people who thought it was perfectly acceptable to Scarab Conga Line into a turn 1 assault back before they FAQ'd that out)

Vehicles are units in their own right and cannot join other units.

As for can a Repair Barge repair Royal Court members that are joined to a Warrior Unit - RAW says models and RC members become part of the unit in their rules.

However - talk it over with your opponent (possibly before the game) and decide/roll off on how to play it. It's one of those instances where it's too easy to interpret one way or the other. Be the better player and be open about it.

Or better yet, don't base your strategy around such a niche case. Crypteks and Lords joined to Warriors aren't known to be a winning strategy.

 skoffs wrote:
It is blatantly obvious the thing is only meant to be able to bring back Warriors.
People who think being able to re-add 150 points worth of ResOrb/Phase Shifter/Warscythe/Mindshackle Scarab/Sempiternal Weave carrying Lord is what the Repair Barge function of the Ghost Ark is meant to be used for are not playing RAI. They are trying to find a RAW loophole they can exploit.

Cite evidence. Because I'm not even a Necron player and I think it should bring back RC members.

(no doubt the same people who thought it was perfectly acceptable to Scarab Conga Line into a turn 1 assault back before they FAQ'd that out)

It's almost like you have no basis for that claim - oh, right.. you don't. You're making things up. Because this is absolutely false.

Assuming the intent was that you could add RC members as well, would they even get anything beyond their basic wargear? The models added are new models, so I'm not seeing permission to add upgrades to models spawned.

 Happyjew wrote:
Assuming the intent was that you could add RC members as well, would they even get anything beyond their basic wargear? The models added are new models, so I'm not seeing permission to add upgrades to models spawned.

Hmm, that seems like a fair point,
only time I attach a lord, is when theres 20 warriors and I put lord with res orb...
but if you wouldnt get the res orb again, it would certainly be pointless

rigeld2 wrote:

 skoffs wrote:
It is blatantly obvious the thing is only meant to be able to bring back Warriors.
People who think being able to re-add 150 points worth of ResOrb/Phase Shifter/Warscythe/Mindshackle Scarab/Sempiternal Weave carrying Lord is what the Repair Barge function of the Ghost Ark is meant to be used for are not playing RAI. They are trying to find a RAW loophole they can exploit.

Cite evidence. Because I'm not even a Necron player and I think it should bring back RC members.

Unfortunately, that's not possible, as the rule as written simply says "model"... that's it. Completely ambiguous.
Looking at the physical model of the Ghost Ark itself, we can see it's full of broken Warriors. A RAI player would see this and go, "oh, ok, so it means it can replace fallen Warriors. That makes sense." Somebody looking to abuse RAW, on the other hand, would look at the codex entry and go, "oh, 'model', eh? Well Imotekh is a 'model'. A Destroyer Lord is a 'model'. All of these expensive Combat Lords are 'models'. That means as long as I have functioning Ghost Arks near the unit of Warriors that I initially attached all these HQ to, I can bring them back every turn, no matter how many times they die!"
This ambiguity is but one of many examples of poorly written rules to come out of that mess of a codex. I don't know how many FAQs we've had, and they STILL haven't addressed all of them yet.

(no doubt the same people who thought it was perfectly acceptable to Scarab Conga Line into a turn 1 assault back before they FAQ'd that out)

It's almost like you have no basis for that claim - oh, right.. you don't. You're making things up. Because this is absolutely false.

Yeah. This is one of those 'shoddy games-craftsmanship' trivia points that GW is infamous for.

My Vote is for warriors 'and' attached crypteks and/or lords (with the original wargear purchased for same), not ICs or anything not originally a part of the unit at the beginning of the game. I do realise this is completely arbitrary, and would love an Errata to clarify if it was meant to be just warriors or not.

I think we should start calling stuff like this 'No Eyes' examples, after the first such ridiculously blatant problem with strict RAW.

I would say warriors and attached RC members myself. With what ever gear they were purchased with.

You try to build a list around that and you will fail it is not op lol.