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.

 Ghaz wrote:
With the writers they have, who says that Writer A even realized that Writer B removed the option to carry Jump Infantry? Regardless, as the rules stand it cannot carry Jump Infantry and there is no clear indication of what their intentions were (which doesn't change the rules anyway).

Wrong. As the rules stand, the night scythe can carry the praetorians.

col_impact wrote:
Carried models are embarked upon their transports. Embarking does not happen however during deployment. Embarking only happens during movement phase by definition.

Correction, "voluntary embarking" only happens during the Movement Phase by definition.

During deployment when something is deployed in a transport it is embarked upon that transport without having to go through embarking. That is RAW.

Where does it say it ignores embarking? This is only an assumption at this point.

And where does it state that deploying in to a Transport is embarked without embarking? You still haven't answered that, even after all this time.

col_impact wrote:
Why keep it as a dedicated transport if it cannot be used as a dedicated transport? The RAI is obvious that the praetorians can ride along in the night scythe. The rules even make this intent clear.

Spoiler:

The only limitation of a Dedicated Transport is that when it is deployed, it can
only carry the unit it was selected with (plus any Independent Characters that
have joined it).

Sorry, no matter how you try to push it, a limitation is not authority to ignore other limitations.

Jump infantry follow the rules for infantry. What you have posted is a rule for transport vehicles, not the rules for infantry.

I know that sounds like a stupid argument, but so does the last 7 pages of this thread, so i thought I'd join in

Charistoph wrote:

col_impact wrote:
Carried models are embarked upon their transports. Embarking does not happen however during deployment. Embarking only happens during movement phase by definition.

Correction, "voluntary embarking" only happens during the Movement Phase by definition.

During deployment when something is deployed in a transport it is embarked upon that transport without having to go through embarking. That is RAW.

Where does it say it ignores embarking? This is only an assumption at this point.

And where does it state that deploying in to a Transport is embarked without embarking? You still haven't answered that, even after all this time.

The rules for embarking are exceedingly clear that embarking only happens during the movement phase. Feel free to point to a definition of embarking that allows you to go through a process of embarking outside of a movement phase. If you cannot find such a rule then no embarking process happens per RAW.

col_impact wrote:
The rules for embarking are exceedingly clear that embarking only happens during the movement phase. Feel free to point to a definition of embarking that allows you to go through a process of embarking outside of a movement phase. If you cannot find such a rule then no embarking process happens per RAW.

Spoiler:

Models can only voluntarily embark or disembark in the Movement phase.

I've said it twice now, and I've bolded and colored it above. Now, can you point out where deploying in to a Transport is a "voluntary embark" for the models as opposed to a "previously performed embark" or "involuntary embark" (I think some Formations like the Skyhammer would fit in to this last one)?

If not, than we can drop the Movement Phase requirement from the discussion.

Charistoph wrote:

col_impact wrote:
The rules for embarking are exceedingly clear that embarking only happens during the movement phase. Feel free to point to a definition of embarking that allows you to go through a process of embarking outside of a movement phase. If you cannot find such a rule then no embarking process happens per RAW.

Spoiler:

Models can only voluntarily embark or disembark in the Movement phase.

I've said it twice now, and I've bolded and colored it above. Now, can you point out where deploying in to a Transport is a "voluntary embark" for the models as opposed to a "previously performed embark" or "involuntary embark" (I think some Formations like the Skyhammer would fit in to this last one)?

If not, than we can drop the Movement Phase requirement from the discussion.

Point to any rules for embarking besides the ones I have quoted which are required to take place during the movement phase. We cannot drop the rules for embarking that mention the movement phase because if we did that we would have no rules at all for embarking.

col_impact wrote:
Point to any rules for embarking besides the ones I have quoted which are required to take place during the movement phase. We cannot drop the rules for embarking that mention the movement phase because if we did that we would have no rules at all for embarking.

Well, let's see, unless you are willing to ignore the tense rules of English, there is the rules for Combined Reserve Units which state:

BRB wrote:Similarly, you must specify if any units in Reserve are embarked upon any Transport vehicles in Reserve, in which case they will arrive together.

Of course, there is also the possibility of synonyms, too, of which the following would apply:

BRB wrote:DEPLOYMENT
...Models can be deployed ‘inside’ buildings, fortifications, or Transport vehicles in their deployment zone, subject to their Transport Capacity....

Of which, "deploying inside" is a synonym of "embarking", which would actually be important if they ever actually want to get out without having to kill their Transport.

And of course, the rules for Embarking and Disembarking only discuss "voluntarily" embarking and disembarking, and nothing in Deployment or other Mission Rules do not ever mention that placing a unit inside a Vehicle is "voluntary", so doesn't care about that section.

Of course, the Embarking rules do talk about being within 2" during the Movement Phase, but only list this as a "can", and not as, "this is the only method that may be used", either. Which allows Deployment and Combined Reserve Units sections to just allow you the player to just "declare it."

Unfortunately, as with much of GW rules, a lot of the rules are set up requiring either a full awareness of ALL the rules or to read between the lines and handwave your way around things.

Your approach is to handwave the restrictions against Jump and Jet Pack Infantry embarking so you can get what you want. This unfortunately, leads to many weird situations where units would be able to board a Transport before the game that they won't be able to board later in the game (assuming that one could do that with a Night Scythe in the first place, of course).

Whereas my approach is to handwave the timings of how embarking is defined, such as units deployed in to a Transport during Deployment or declared embarked in Reserves, they went through a pre-game Movement Phase embarking process to get in, as part of defining the narrative.

Edit: I did find a unit that can be a Jump Infantry unit AND take a Dedicated Transport that one could get back in to: The Blood Angels Command Squad. The unit can take Jump Packs AND a Dedicated Transport.

In Col_Impact's position, this squad can purchase Jump Packs and a Rhino, be deployed in said Rhino, Disembark during the game, but then can't get back in... Drop Pod would be included, too, but no one can get back in to a deployed Drop Pod. Razorbacks would also be possible, but are just a little too tight.

And you call this RAI?

Charistoph wrote:


Your approach is to handwave the restrictions against Jump and Jet Pack Infantry embarking so you can get what you want. This unfortunately, leads to many weird situations where units would be able to board a Transport before the game that they won't be able to board later in the game (assuming that one could do that with a Night Scythe in the first place, of course).

Whereas my approach is to handwave the timings of how embarking is defined, such as units deployed in to a Transport during Deployment or declared embarked in Reserves, they went through a pre-game Movement Phase embarking process to get in, as part of defining the narrative.

My approach is strictest RAW and involves no handwaving. The rules as they are do not allow for an embarking process to happen at deployment. Jump pack infantry are restricted from embarking. But embarking per RAW does not happen at deployment.

The rules do not allow the Voluntary embarking process to occur. Please shojjw the involuntary embarking process

Please stop removing context. Dedicated transports sit within the Transport rules. Turning a liimtation into a general permission is nonsense.

So under drop pod rules for blood angels 7th it says

Transport Capacity: Ten models or one Dreadnought of any type. Once a Drop Pod lands, all passengers must disembark and no models can embark for the rest of the game.

The "10 models or one dreadnought" is how many the drop pod can hold But there is no specifically stated permission given for the dreadnought to embark onto the drop pod so how can the dreadnought be embarked on the drop pod?

Those rules say that a Drop Pod can carry a Dreadnought.

Nightscythes do not have that specific permission for Praetorians.

More than just the movement phase it also requires you to have moved them to within 2" of an entry point. It requires that the transport not have moved a certain distance.... We all know the requirements of embarking and we know we cannot meet those requirements.

By the line of thinking that models have to have embarked to be embarked, we know all models that are deployed in dangerous or difficult terrain moved through that terrain. Will you hold that the required rolls be made for that? Did you allow jinking models to jink in the previous edition? There are a vast number of states that can be reached at deployment that generally require previous steps but which we willingly ignore. All of the rules for embarking regulate the act of embarking not the state of being embarked. You may look at that and say that they have to embark to be embarked but there is no rule controlling this. Without that it does not exist in a permissive ruleset, can anyone point out a time in the deployment rules that it even refer to deployment in a transport as embarking?

Gravmyr wrote:
Without that it does not exist in a permissive ruleset, can anyone point out a time in the deployment rules that it even refer to deployment in a transport as deployment?

DEPLOYMENT wrote:Models can be deployed 'inside' buildings fortifications, or Transport vehicles in their deployment zone, subject to their Transport Capacity.

Sorry mistype. Fixing it now deployment inside a transport as embarking.

So Pretorians can take a night sythe as a dedicated transport.

They can deploy "inside" them per the above rule as long as they do not exceed the 15 model capacity.

They can then disembark at after they come in from reserves but cannot re embark in the night sythe due to them being jump infantry.

Is there something I'm missing RAW? RAI doesn't really concern me.

Basically yes that is the way I read it.

 Frozocrone wrote:
Those rules say that a Drop Pod can carry a Dreadnought.

Nightscythes do not have that specific permission for Praetorians.

But where is the permission for the Dreadnought to embark? There is nothing in that Transport capacity rule that gives any more permission that Praetorians being able to use the Night Scythe as a DT. Neither unit can embark, but both have permission to "carry" the unit.

Epartalis wrote:So Pretorians can take a night sythe as a dedicated transport.

They can deploy "inside" them per the above rule as long as they do not exceed the 15 model capacity.

They can then disembark at after they come in from reserves but cannot re embark in the night sythe due to them being jump infantry.

Is there something I'm missing RAW? RAI doesn't really concern me.

1st issue, the above rule about a unit deploying inside a transport only grants permission to deploy inside a transport that is in your deployment zone. The Night Scythe will be in reserves, not your deployment zone so that rule is moot for this specific situation. but could be important if we wanted to discuss non flyer transports.

2nd issue. They can not disembark. Either they have embarked before coming in from reserves or not. If claim they have embarked we must ask how a jump infantry unit was allowed to do that. If we claim they merely apear in the transport and have not technically embarked then they will never begin the movement phase embarked (and will never meet the requirements to disembark)

Fragile wrote:

 Frozocrone wrote:
Those rules say that a Drop Pod can carry a Dreadnought.

Nightscythes do not have that specific permission for Praetorians.

But where is the permission for the Dreadnought to embark? There is nothing in that Transport capacity rule that gives any more permission that Praetorians being able to use the Night Scythe as a DT. Neither unit can embark, but both have permission to "carry" the unit.

The drop pod's transport capacity specifically lists a dreadnought. This is a specific exception to the transport capacity rules. It is the transport capacity rules that bar non-infantry model from embarking. By listing the dreadnought in the drop pods's transport capacity they have given permission for a dreadnought to embark upon a drop pod. The Night Scythe has no exception to its transport capacity.




Automatically Appended Next Post:
Potential scenario for those who would allow the praetorians in the night scythe. I am playing Inquisition. I have an inquisitor in Terminator Armour that has 3 acolyte henchmen. Those henchmen have a rhino as a dedicated transport. Can the inquisitor be deployed with the henchmen in this rhino?

col_impact wrote:

Charistoph wrote:


Your approach is to handwave the restrictions against Jump and Jet Pack Infantry embarking so you can get what you want. This unfortunately, leads to many weird situations where units would be able to board a Transport before the game that they won't be able to board later in the game (assuming that one could do that with a Night Scythe in the first place, of course).

Whereas my approach is to handwave the timings of how embarking is defined, such as units deployed in to a Transport during Deployment or declared embarked in Reserves, they went through a pre-game Movement Phase embarking process to get in, as part of defining the narrative.

My approach is strictest RAW and involves no handwaving. The rules as they are do not allow for an embarking process to happen at deployment. Jump pack infantry are restricted from embarking. But embarking per RAW does not happen at deployment.

Where does it say that a unit may not embark during deployment? I see the one about "voluntary embarking". How does one define that? Where does it state that being embarked during deployment is voluntary for the models?

And, yes, you are trying to handwave the restrictions away.

Gravmyr wrote:More than just the movement phase it also requires you to have moved them to within 2" of an entry point. It requires that the transport not have moved a certain distance.... We all know the requirements of embarking and we know we cannot meet those requirements.

The rules state that a unit within 2" can embark. It does not state this as a requirement. The Reserves rules actually state that a unit can start embarked a transport, without being within 2" during the Movement Phase.

By the line of thinking that models have to have embarked to be embarked, we know all models that are deployed in dangerous or difficult terrain moved through that terrain. Will you hold that the required rolls be made for that? Did you allow jinking models to jink in the previous edition? There are a vast number of states that can be reached at deployment that generally require previous steps but which we willingly ignore. All of the rules for embarking regulate the act of embarking not the state of being embarked. You may look at that and say that they have to embark to be embarked but there is no rule controlling this. Without that it does not exist in a permissive ruleset, can anyone point out a time in the deployment rules that it even refer to deployment in a transport as embarking?

Embarked is a form of embark. We have not been told to separate this relationship, so we may not. A unit may not be embarked without taking embark in to consideration.

By the same logic then a squad of 5 man assault/vanguard vet marines can use a fast attack drop pod!!

Charistoph wrote:

The rules state that a unit within 2" can embark. It does not state this as a requirement. The Reserves rules actually state that a unit can start embarked a transport, without being within 2" during the Movement Phase.

BRB wrote:The whole unit must be able to embark – if some models are out of range, the entire unit must stay outside.

That reads as a requirement to me, that a must not a can.

Charistoph wrote:

Embarked is a form of embark. We have not been told to separate this relationship, so we may not. A unit may not be embarked without taking embark in to consideration.

Which is a logic argument not a rules argument would you care to back this up with a rule? We have also not been told by the rules that there is a relationship, that is a logical assumption nothing more. Find a rule stating you have to embark to be embarked. This is exactly like the IC rules interacting with the chariot. There is nothing that stops it from being in the state of being embarked just from embarking.

Gravmyr wrote:

BRB wrote:The whole unit must be able to embark – if some models are out of range, the entire unit must stay outside.

That reads as a requirement to me, that a must not a can.

That is a requirement, but its also not relevant to what he said.

Gravmyr wrote:

Charistoph wrote:

Embarked is a form of embark. We have not been told to separate this relationship, so we may not. A unit may not be embarked without taking embark in to consideration.

Which is a logic argument not a rules argument would you care to back this up with a rule? We have also not been told by the rules that there is a relationship, that is a logical assumption nothing more. Find a rule stating you have to embark to be embarked. This is exactly like the IC rules interacting with the chariot. There is nothing that stops it from being in the state of being embarked just from embarking.

There is no such rule within the game. It is a rule of language. The rules of langue will not, and need not be explained in the rules of the game. Asking some one to find such a rule is the equivalent of asking for a rule stating that to 'have moved', a model must 'move'.

IC rules and chariots? Care to explain that comparison?

It's relevent to what I said which he said were not requirements.

An IC cannot join a unit that contains a vehicle, in 6th they did not remove IC from the overlord when mounting on a chariot. Which meant when it joined the unit there was no vehicle preventing joining but people argued that it kicked it out of the unit despite there being no rule stating so. The same is true here, there is no rule telling us what to do when the unit is already embarked just rules that say they cannot embark. I'm glad you brought up moving as there are a number of times when a unit did not move yet it is treated as having moved. This is the same as that as well, the unit is embarked despite having not actively embarked. Do you see now why we cannot simply assume that you had to embark to be embarked?

To have climbed a mountain, you must have been climbing a mountain.

To have eaten a meal, you must have been eating a meal.

Are people arguing past and present tense? ...ok

If you walk into a room and are wearing a white shirt and are told you cannot put on a white shirt, do you have to take it off?

Yeah, you can take a white shirt, you're just not allowed to wear it. Same applies to Praetorians.

Really, this is a case of 'restrictive permissions'. You can take a DT Nightscythe, but due to the embarking rules of Transports, you're not allowed to embark on it.

I'm out though, because I see exactly where this is going to go and I, for one, do not wish to repeat that experience.

Which isn't what I asked but thanks for your input.

 HANZERtank wrote:
Page 80 BRB, Only Infantry models may embark upon Transports (this does not include Jump or Jet Pack Infantry), unless specifically stated otherwise.

I got 3 pages into this argument and realized people were glazing past this part of the rule every time, assuming it was something added by the person quoting the rule because it was placed in parenthesis. It's not something they added. The underlined/bolded part of the rule quoted above is, indeed, part of the full and actual rule on page 80. It is why jump infantry can't embark on transports.

It is also a reminder, not a specific call out. You can remove the line without the rule changing

Gravmyr wrote:It's relevent to what I said which he said were not requirements.

An IC cannot join a unit that contains a vehicle, in 6th they did not remove IC from the overlord when mounting on a chariot. Which meant when it joined the unit there was no vehicle preventing joining but people argued that it kicked it out of the unit despite there being no rule stating so. The same is true here, there is no rule telling us what to do when the unit is already embarked just rules that say they cannot embark. I'm glad you brought up moving as there are a number of times when a unit did not move yet it is treated as having moved. This is the same as that as well, the unit is embarked despite having not actively embarked. Do you see now why we cannot simply assume that you had to embark to be embarked?

Its not relevant because it does nothing to establish that the movement phase is the only time units can embark. His statement was that the permission to embark in the movement phase did not prohibit permission to become embark at any other time, that is was not a restriction.

Still don't know what your getting at. In th 5th edition codex an overlord could take a fast open-topped, skimmer DT that had a single IC transport capacity. The CCB and the overlord were two different units. The IC rule was not removed because the overlord was a passenger and the IC was not joining the CCB's unit. The 7th edition codex is very different and has no IC rule on the chariot. In either case an overlord on a chariot never had permission to join another unit.

Being embarked and being treated like you are embarked would be different things. You treat something as X being true only when X is not true but you want things to behave as if it were. Also, not relevant because we are never told to treat the passengers of a night scythe as anything. In this case the only way be can behave if X is true, is for X to actually be true. In this case X is the unit is embarked.

Gravmyr wrote:If you walk into a room and are wearing a white shirt and are told you cannot put on a white shirt, do you have to take it off?

The white shirt scenario makes no sense. If you can't put on a white shirt you can't walk into a room wearing a white shirt without first having put it on. What your suggesting is that the rules changed to disallow an event after the event has taken place. That's not the case here.