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.

 don_mondo wrote:
Because they have shot it down before, and the rules haven't changed enough that I see it as acceptable now. But just my opinion, so carry on.

They have? (By they I assume you mean GW).

I do not remember any FAQ that said you could not embark. not that it matters, that would have been in a previous edition anyway and has no bearing on the current rules.

 don_mondo wrote:
We all know it's not supposed to be allowed, ...

Do we?

Is it so different to Rage or Half a Scalpel Short in previous editions allowing models to embark in a transport so long as the transport moves towards the enemy?

 don_mondo wrote:
I have to ask. Is anyone really seriously considering this as a legal and viable option? Or is this just easter egg hunting for the purpose of easter egg hunting? We all know it's not supposed to be allowed, so why is it even being discussed? Just had to ask.

Anyways, enjoy your discussion.

Can you say when this was shot down before? It only really became settled in 6th, when units insidfe transports were (finally!) considered fearless, so we knew they could automatically regroup.

emmagine wrote:
Don't let him tell you that like it is some sort of definitive answer. If you try this in a tourney you'll likely get a card.

The rule saying that you "can't move other than to fall back" conflicts with "embarking counts as having moved." You could argue that it doesn't technically state that it counts *as a move*. But the verbiage is close enough that the only sort of people that would accept that interpretation, are 1. not running tournaments and 2. not the sort of casual gamers you'd have fun playing with.

All that said, I think they made a very strong case for being able to embark after regrouping.

I don't have the BRB to hand so this post assume 'counts as having moved' is actually from the rules.

counts as = is, the embarking unit has moved.

There's 2 ways to take that.
Either
1. The rule imposing a state after an action is carried only forward from then rules wise. (EG, no conflict in those because they only count as having moved after.they embark).
Or
2. Regard the later imposed state to interfere with actions taken before it. (EG. The action of embarking is ''undone'' or never existed because having embarked is movement, and that breaks the rules of falling back).

I believe 1. The rules exist in a linear state and 'having' done something is creating a restriction or action from that particular point forward.

As above.

Fairly certain this is also caveated to only mean for firing weapons as well, but cant be sure right now as I'm away from my books.

It is only "counts as" movement after you have embarked, not before.

nosferatu1001 wrote:

 don_mondo wrote:
I have to ask. Is anyone really seriously considering this as a legal and viable option? Or is this just easter egg hunting for the purpose of easter egg hunting? We all know it's not supposed to be allowed, so why is it even being discussed? Just had to ask.

Anyways, enjoy your discussion.

Can you say when this was shot down before? It only really became settled in 6th, when units insidfe transports were (finally!) considered fearless, so we knew they could automatically regroup.

Would have been back when Ork Speed Freaks were an army.

 don_mondo wrote:

nosferatu1001 wrote:

 don_mondo wrote:
I have to ask. Is anyone really seriously considering this as a legal and viable option? Or is this just easter egg hunting for the purpose of easter egg hunting? We all know it's not supposed to be allowed, so why is it even being discussed? Just had to ask.

Anyways, enjoy your discussion.

Can you say when this was shot down before? It only really became settled in 6th, when units insidfe transports were (finally!) considered fearless, so we knew they could automatically regroup.

Would have been back when Ork Speed Freaks were an army.

So 4th, prior to the current Ork codex?

It went through 6th without being FAQd, so I'm not sure it is that clearly going against "RAI"

I've done this several times in 6th, to rally a unit that was below 25% and needed insane courage to pass.

It isn't "new", and it shouldn't be called "rhino rallying" because generally things that have rhinos have ATSKNF.

culsandar wrote:
I've done this several times in 6th, to rally a unit that was below 25% and needed insane courage to pass.

It isn't "new", and it shouldn't be called "rhino rallying" because generally things that have rhinos have ATSKNF.

New name ideas: Chimera Catching, Ghost Arc Grabbing, Serpent Snatching, and Trukk Trapping.

Personally, I've never been able to utilize it because it is a specific scenario that's hard to set up without a lot of transports.

It's easier than you think, especially with a unit that only has one or two guys left. You move the transport first in the way of the guys running at about a 45 degree angle with the rear toward your board edge. The unit has to run around it, so once the unit contacts the tank they move along its edge to round its rear, which is usually where the hatches are located and keeps them within 2" of the hatch for a while.

It's even easier for open topped vehicles that are long like Raiders and Trukks.

culsandar wrote:
I've done this several times in 6th, to rally a unit that was below 25% and needed insane courage to pass.

It isn't "new", and it shouldn't be called "rhino rallying" because generally things that have rhinos have ATSKNF.

I play Mechanized Sisters of Battle, so no, i do not have ATSKNF but i do have A LOT of transports.

Thanks for the tactics though, will have to let my local meta know and start using this =)

 BlackTalos wrote:

culsandar wrote:
I've done this several times in 6th, to rally a unit that was below 25% and needed insane courage to pass.

It isn't "new", and it shouldn't be called "rhino rallying" because generally things that have rhinos have ATSKNF.

I play Mechanized Sisters of Battle, so no, i do not have ATSKNF but i do have A LOT of transports.

Thanks for the tactics though, will have to let my local meta know and start using this =)

Should wait until an FAQ or get some clarification. I know where I just played yesterday this isn't allowed but I doubt this is a universal decision by the shops. To me it seems that armies that use transports will prefer to use this and those who don't are going to disagree.

Also chaos marine and sisters and orks will want to use it, as well as DE, but eldar, IG, marines (who regroup anyway and could always get back in because they make normal moves), tyranids probably won't. Eldar and IG because their transports have one embarkation port in the back of their wide vehicles - if their models move to go around, most won't be within 2".

On the personal side i've chatted with a few Rules-mongers from my group, and it seems all were well aware that this is how it works.

They've been playing catch the Ork with Trukks for ages now (at least all through 6th Ed).

Considering the AV on the Rhinos/Trukks and the positioning you'd have to get right to pull this off, i don't actually see an issue...

Land Raider Scooping might seem worse, but then as pointed out before, most armies with LR will have ATSKNF. Also a waste of a LR if you have to drive back up field to rally 2 running Guardsmen