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.

Alright so I have a question in regards to mounting units in Transports and the new FAQ. If I have a unit of Centurions bought as part of a Gladius how can I get them into a drop pod now, if at all. Can I get a separate CAD of the same army (IE Space Marines with the same chapter tactics) would I be able to buy a POD as a fast attack and mount them in that and still be in compliance with the new FAQ or can I only do that with transports from the same detachment? Either way, thanks in advance for your help.

This argument is quickly becoming the new "can IC benefit from formation bonuses from other formations" argument. The crux is whether or not unit from different detachments but the same faction count a Battle Brothers. There isn't really a consensus for this one, but I'll tell you the two sides of the debate and then state which I lean toward, and hopefully it will be clarified in the next draft of the FAQ:

Team Edward: The Allies Matrix clearly shows that that units are Battle Brothers with their own faction.

Team Jacob: The paragraph immediately preceding the Allies Matrix clearly states that the Allies Matrix is used to determine how units of different factions behave toward each other, and the matrix has no effect on units of the same faction.

I'm on Team Jacob. I believe the overlap in the matrix is just a symptom of how a matrix works when both axes consist of the same list. At some point, a faction is going to overlap with itself. Something has to go in that box, so GW list them as Battle Brothers. I may be wrong in this, but others have submitted the question to the FB page, so hopefully it will be clarified soon.

You may all now commence the condescending dissention.

 EnTyme wrote:
I'm on Team Jacob. I believe the overlap in the matrix is just a symptom of how a matrix works when both axes consist of the same list. At some point, a faction is going to overlap with itself. Something has to go in that box, so GW list them as Battle Brothers.

I agree though I am unaffected myself either way

If you accept that a faction is Battle Brothers with itself then no unit within even the same detachment may embark on any transport vehicle of the same faction during deployment.

I'd argue no (being the Team Edward here) as my stance is following Battle Brothers between detachments.

But I did ask this question in response to the FAQ on Facebook regarding transports and the same faction (my example being Blitz Brigade and an Ork CAD) so hopefully it will be clarified when the FAQ's are made official.

 Mr. Shine wrote:
If you accept that a faction is Battle Brothers with itself then no unit within even the same detachment may embark on any transport vehicle of the same faction during deployment.

So what rules do we have then that would allow them to embark on a transport from a different detachment if they're not using the allies rules for Battle Brothers?

 EnTyme wrote:


You may all now commence the condescending dissention.

One Couldn't write a better introduction to a Warhammer rule debate. Exalted!

If it's the same codex it's the same army not allies so you are ok

 Ghaz wrote:

 Mr. Shine wrote:
If you accept that a faction is Battle Brothers with itself then no unit within even the same detachment may embark on any transport vehicle of the same faction during deployment.

So what rules do we have then that would allow them to embark on a transport from a different detachment if they're not using the allies rules for Battle Brothers?

{Jacob} They are from the same Faction, so do not use the Allies rules at all. Every single portion of the Allies rules up to the explanation of the Levels of Alliance state that this is for how units of different Factions interact.

I'm in the Jacobs camp as well, both because of the above (Allied Matrix is only used for different factions) and because the Faq only stated battle brothers, not different detachments.

 Charistoph wrote:

 Ghaz wrote:

 Mr. Shine wrote:
If you accept that a faction is Battle Brothers with itself then no unit within even the same detachment may embark on any transport vehicle of the same faction during deployment.

So what rules do we have then that would allow them to embark on a transport from a different detachment if they're not using the allies rules for Battle Brothers?

{Jacob} They are from the same Faction, so do not use the Allies rules at all. Every single portion of the Allies rules up to the explanation of the Levels of Alliance state that this is for how units of different Factions interact.

So there are no rules whatsoever on how detachments of the same Faction interact, but we have rules for how detachments of different Factions interact? Seems like we're missing some of the rules which dictate how different detachments interact then.

I'm more than willing to let detachments from the same codex function as one giant detachment. I really don't think that needs a nerf.

 Ghaz wrote:

 Charistoph wrote:

 Ghaz wrote:

 Mr. Shine wrote:
If you accept that a faction is Battle Brothers with itself then no unit within even the same detachment may embark on any transport vehicle of the same faction during deployment.

So what rules do we have then that would allow them to embark on a transport from a different detachment if they're not using the allies rules for Battle Brothers?

{Jacob} They are from the same Faction, so do not use the Allies rules at all. Every single portion of the Allies rules up to the explanation of the Levels of Alliance state that this is for how units of different Factions interact.

So there are no rules whatsoever on how detachments of the same Faction interact, but we have rules for how detachments of different Factions interact? Seems like we're missing some of the rules which dictate how different detachments interact then.

Do we not just follow the rules for transports? what's stopping a space marine transport from carrying a space marine unit? (assuming things like unit type and capacity are adhered to)

 Ghaz wrote:

 Charistoph wrote:

 Ghaz wrote:

 Mr. Shine wrote:
If you accept that a faction is Battle Brothers with itself then no unit within even the same detachment may embark on any transport vehicle of the same faction during deployment.

So what rules do we have then that would allow them to embark on a transport from a different detachment if they're not using the allies rules for Battle Brothers?

{Jacob} They are from the same Faction, so do not use the Allies rules at all. Every single portion of the Allies rules up to the explanation of the Levels of Alliance state that this is for how units of different Factions interact.

So there are no rules whatsoever on how detachments of the same Faction interact, but we have rules for how detachments of different Factions interact? Seems like we're missing some of the rules which dictate how different detachments interact then.

By this logic, NO unit may start the game embarked upon a transport. The alliance rules govern how MODELS and UNITS from different factions interact (i.e. deployment restrictions, one eye open, contest/score objectives, etc.) within an ARMY. The alliance rules do not govern how DETACHMENTS from different factions interact. The rules on 126 and 127 explicitly avoid detachments and reference armies in every case because the rules apply equally to bound and unbound armies. If you extend the matrix to be a pure function and assume that models/units from the same faction are battle brothers to one another, then no unit may be embarked in a transport to start the game.

The alliance rules NEVER use the word detachment. Not once. They do use a variation of "army" at least 4 times and a reference to models/units at least 10 times. They also explicitly say "This section tells you how models from different Factions fight alongside each other." When you combine this with the BRB and Codex descriptions about how to organize an army, it is clear that the alliance rules never come into play if all models are from a single faction.

You know what, I used to be team Edward, but I think I'm switching to team Jacob. Specifically because the rules about allies in the rulebook states that they describe what happens to UNITS that have different factions, and not DETACHMENTS that have different factions.

BRB, Allies, Levels of Alliance wrote:The Allies Matrix below shows the levels of alliance between units that have different Factions in the same army.

A strict RAW interpretation means that the allies matrix doesn't care about what detachment they're from, just what faction they are.

PanzerLeader wrote:

 Ghaz wrote:

 Charistoph wrote:

 Ghaz wrote:

 Mr. Shine wrote:
If you accept that a faction is Battle Brothers with itself then no unit within even the same detachment may embark on any transport vehicle of the same faction during deployment.

So what rules do we have then that would allow them to embark on a transport from a different detachment if they're not using the allies rules for Battle Brothers?

{Jacob} They are from the same Faction, so do not use the Allies rules at all. Every single portion of the Allies rules up to the explanation of the Levels of Alliance state that this is for how units of different Factions interact.

So there are no rules whatsoever on how detachments of the same Faction interact, but we have rules for how detachments of different Factions interact? Seems like we're missing some of the rules which dictate how different detachments interact then.

By this logic, NO unit may start the game embarked upon a transport. The alliance rules govern how MODELS and UNITS from different factions interact (i.e. deployment restrictions, one eye open, contest/score objectives, etc.) within an ARMY. The alliance rules do not govern how DETACHMENTS from different factions interact. The rules on 126 and 127 explicitly avoid detachments and reference armies in every case because the rules apply equally to bound and unbound armies. If you extend the matrix to be a pure function and assume that models/units from the same faction are battle brothers to one another, then no unit may be embarked in a transport to start the game.

Or we could look at it as the basic rules cover the interactions between units of the same Factions, but that Allies are an Advanced Rule, so take precedence where applicable, i.e. units having different Factions in an army.

So if the basic interactions allow embarking in another detachment's transports, then why are Battle Brothers given explicit permission to embark in each others transports if the permission already exists? Why are Allies of Convenience not forbidden from entering each other's transports (ignoring the whole can't be within 2' thing)? There are too many inconsistencies in the Battle Brothers/Allies of Convenience rules to say that there is a default set of rules governing inter-detachment interactions. Hence I stand by my statement that we're missing rules for how two or more detachments of the same faction interact if they're not considered Battle Brothers.

 Charistoph wrote:

PanzerLeader wrote:

 Ghaz wrote:

 Charistoph wrote:

 Ghaz wrote:

 Mr. Shine wrote:
If you accept that a faction is Battle Brothers with itself then no unit within even the same detachment may embark on any transport vehicle of the same faction during deployment.

So what rules do we have then that would allow them to embark on a transport from a different detachment if they're not using the allies rules for Battle Brothers?

{Jacob} They are from the same Faction, so do not use the Allies rules at all. Every single portion of the Allies rules up to the explanation of the Levels of Alliance state that this is for how units of different Factions interact.

So there are no rules whatsoever on how detachments of the same Faction interact, but we have rules for how detachments of different Factions interact? Seems like we're missing some of the rules which dictate how different detachments interact then.

By this logic, NO unit may start the game embarked upon a transport. The alliance rules govern how MODELS and UNITS from different factions interact (i.e. deployment restrictions, one eye open, contest/score objectives, etc.) within an ARMY. The alliance rules do not govern how DETACHMENTS from different factions interact. The rules on 126 and 127 explicitly avoid detachments and reference armies in every case because the rules apply equally to bound and unbound armies. If you extend the matrix to be a pure function and assume that models/units from the same faction are battle brothers to one another, then no unit may be embarked in a transport to start the game.

Or we could look at it as the basic rules cover the interactions between units of the same Factions, but that Allies are an Advanced Rule, so take precedence where applicable, i.e. units having different Factions in an army.

So if you look at it that way, why would detachments matter? The basic rules would cover how units/models from the same faction interact within an army (following the language as presented by the allies section). Detachments provide a specific way to organize units within an army and provide those units with additional benefits. This is clear by the wording on 118: "If you opt to choose an army using this method [Battle-forged], your units are organized into Detachments and many gain special rules and in-game advantages."

In fact, the BRB is even clear that a detachment could include units from multiple factions: "A unit's Faction applies regardless of how you choose your army, but is especially relevant to Detachments because many state that you can only include units of a particular Faction." Many, not all. Some detachments (i.e. formations, Decurion-like detachments) are even more specific in restricting unit selection and chapter tactic selection.

In summary, the allies rules govern how models/units from different factions interact. The detachment rules cover how units in your army are organized. The detachment rules do not care about faction except as a restriction on how you can organize units into detachments. Detachments are in no way related to how units interact with other units based on faction.

 Ghaz wrote:
So if the basic interactions allow embarking in another detachment's transports, then why are Battle Brothers given explicit permission to embark in each others transports if the permission already exists? Why are Allies of Convenience not forbidden from entering each other's transports (ignoring the whole can't be within 2' thing)? There are too many inconsistencies in the Battle Brothers/Allies of Convenience rules to say that there is a default set of rules governing inter-detachment interactions. Hence I stand by my statement that we're missing rules for how two or more detachments of the same faction interact if they're not considered Battle Brothers.

Battle brothers are treated as "friendly" units. the list of benefits are just examples of what friendly units can do, which we already have rules for.

any other allies have a list of exceptions to what your units can normally do

Ghaz wrote:So if the basic interactions allow embarking in another detachment's transports, then why are Battle Brothers given explicit permission to embark in each others transports if the permission already exists? Why are Allies of Convenience not forbidden from entering each other's transports (ignoring the whole can't be within 2' thing)? There are too many inconsistencies in the Battle Brothers/Allies of Convenience rules to say that there is a default set of rules governing inter-detachment interactions. Hence I stand by my statement that we're missing rules for how two or more detachments of the same faction interact if they're not considered Battle Brothers.

Any units not of the same Faction or Battle Brothers are considered enemies for almost all those purposes you describe. For example, can a unit board an enemy transport?

Remember the beginning to Battle Brothers and Allies of Convenience:

Battle Brothers
Units from the same army that are Battle Brothers treat each other as ‘friendly units’ for all rules purposes. This means, for example, that units...

Allies of Convenience
Units from the same army that are Allies of Convenience treat each other as ‘enemy units’ that cannot be charged, shot, attacked in close combat, or targeted with psychic powers. This means, for example, that units...

All those little notes are just examples of what to do in those situations to help define the situations, not really actual rules in and of themselves. Admittedly, that is why this Transport rule for Deployment alone makes no sense since there is no standard in the current rulebook for it.

PanzerLeader wrote:So if you look at it that way, why would detachments matter? The basic rules would cover how units/models from the same faction interact within an army (following the language as presented by the allies section). Detachments provide a specific way to organize units within an army and provide those units with additional benefits. This is clear by the wording on 118: "If you opt to choose an army using this method [Battle-forged], your units are organized into Detachments and many gain special rules and in-game advantages."

In fact, the BRB is even clear that a detachment could include units from multiple factions: "A unit's Faction applies regardless of how you choose your army, but is especially relevant to Detachments because many state that you can only include units of a particular Faction." Many, not all. Some detachments (i.e. formations, Decurion-like detachments) are even more specific in restricting unit selection and chapter tactic selection

In summary, the allies rules govern how models/units from different factions interact. The detachment rules cover how units in your army are organized. The detachment rules do not care about faction except as a restriction on how you can organize units into detachments. Detachments are in no way related to how units interact with other units based on faction.

Pretty much, especially on the last paragraph.

Do keep in mind, that while MOST detachments are restricted to representing one Faction, not all are (in fact I know of one for certain, possibly a second, depending on Cypher's Faction).

 jokerkd wrote:

 Ghaz wrote:
So if the basic interactions allow embarking in another detachment's transports, then why are Battle Brothers given explicit permission to embark in each others transports if the permission already exists? Why are Allies of Convenience not forbidden from entering each other's transports (ignoring the whole can't be within 2' thing)? There are too many inconsistencies in the Battle Brothers/Allies of Convenience rules to say that there is a default set of rules governing inter-detachment interactions. Hence I stand by my statement that we're missing rules for how two or more detachments of the same faction interact if they're not considered Battle Brothers.

Battle brothers are treated as "friendly" units. the list of benefits are just examples of what friendly units can do, which we already have rules for.

any other allies have a list of exceptions to what your units can normally do

So Battle Brothers is a superfluous list telling us what they can already do while Allies of Convenience is a list of restrictions removing permissions? And you don't see where that can cause confusion if they never state as much in the Allies rules?

Jacob. When the allies chart was drawn, I don't think GW envisioned any downside to being battle brothers. I'm pretty sure they will make a carve out for same faction.

That being said, the guts of this question actually should result in another FAQ besides just transports. I hope the rules team is willing to re-do their pretty charts and put one more in.

Ghaz wrote:
So Battle Brothers is a superfluous list telling us what they can already do while Allies of Convenience is a list of restrictions removing permissions? And you don't see where that can cause confusion if they never state as much in the Allies rules?

Good thing they are all in the Allies rules then, yes?

I wouldn't call it superfluous, though. Units from the same Faction in the same army are always friendly. Units from different Factions may have some questionability on it. So it gets clarified. Furthermore, it allows some quick definitions for the Chart and later changes, such as for the Charcaradons.

Which again goes back to GW never telling us that the Battle Brothers is the 'default' for inter-detachment interactions, and if it is the default then wouldn't that make the FAQ applicable to the same faction as well?

 Ghaz wrote:
Which again goes back to GW never telling us that the Battle Brothers is the 'default' for inter-detachment interactions, and if it is the default then wouldn't that make the FAQ applicable to the same faction as well?

Because Battle Brother interactions AREN'T for inter-detachment interactions, they are for inter-Faction interactions.

Detachments are not mentioned once in the Allies section, so why would the Allies rules have anything to do with detachments?

Technically speaking, if you had a Detachment that was running several different Factions, and they were all Come The Apocalypse, you could not deploy some of the Detachment's units next to each other.

 Ghaz wrote:
So Battle Brothers is a superfluous list telling us what they can already do while Allies of Convenience is a list of restrictions removing permissions? And you don't see where that can cause confusion if they never state as much in the Allies rules?

Yes, this is why Peanut Butter Jars here have to state "May Contain Peanuts" over the name and the list of ingredients. Because there are people in this world who will forego common sense just because it wasn't spelt out for them.

It's this kind of shenanigans that makes me dislike the entire idea of detachments and allies. On top of the utter wreck of balance it did to the codexes, it also creates hilariously bad loopholes like this.

I love how everyone has adopted my "Team Edward - Team Jacob" joke. It seems to have made the debate less contentious, and that was the point. It shows how ridiculous it is to have an emotional investment in a rules debate about a game that is supposed to be fun. Can we adopt this format in other threads? It would make YMDC a much friendlier place.

Post it in Nuts and Bolts. I was discussing something similar with Yakface where we just vote on such things.

 EnTyme wrote:
I love how everyone has adopted my "Team Edward - Team Jacob" joke. It seems to have made the debate less contentious, and that was the point. It shows how ridiculous it is to have an emotional investment in a rules debate about a game that is supposed to be fun. Can we adopt this format in other threads? It would make YMDC a much friendlier place.

Yes! Also, I think in this case everybody thinks that the ruling will get clarified, and so I don't think too many people are emotionally vested in it yet.

If the ruling stands that 2 detachments of the same faction can't deploy in the other's vehicles...I think we'll get more grumbling.

 JimOnMars wrote:

 EnTyme wrote:
I love how everyone has adopted my "Team Edward - Team Jacob" joke. It seems to have made the debate less contentious, and that was the point. It shows how ridiculous it is to have an emotional investment in a rules debate about a game that is supposed to be fun. Can we adopt this format in other threads? It would make YMDC a much friendlier place.

Yes! Also, I think in this case everybody thinks that the ruling will get clarified, and so I don't think too many people are emotionally vested in it yet.

If the ruling stands that 2 detachments of the same faction can't deploy in the other's vehicles...I think we'll get more grumbling.

That's not necessarily how it stands now though. That's what the team edward/jacob thing is about