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.

I'm really torn on this. I have always read it as being like BCB explains... but I can see the other argument now.

The fulcrum of the argument (and the reason I don't think we can resolve it) is...

WITHOUT ambush, I pick a unit to set up on the battlefield. It's a transport, so I can tuck other stuff in it as per the rules.

WITH ambush, I pick three units to set up in ambush. One's a transport, but I now can't tuck stuff in it unless I've also chosen them as one of my 3 with the stratagem.

I don't see that there's enough evidence in the rules either way. You can argue that the standard 40k rules for transports take precedence... or you can argue that the words "pick three units" take precedence. Both sound right.

 Silentz wrote:
I'm really torn on this. I have always read it as being like BCB explains... but I can see the other argument now.

The fulcrum of the argument (and the reason I don't think we can resolve it) is...

WITHOUT ambush, I pick a unit to set up on the battlefield. It's a transport, so I can tuck other stuff in it as per the rules.

WITH ambush, I pick three units to set up in ambush. One's a transport, but I now can't tuck stuff in it unless I've also chosen them as one of my 3 with the stratagem.

I don't see that there's enough evidence in the rules either way. You can argue that the standard 40k rules for transports take precedence... or you can argue that the words "pick three units" take precedence. Both sound right.

Aye, and muddying the waters: "Choose up to three Tallarn units to setup in ambush instead of placing them on the battlefield."

So not three units, three specifically Tallarn units. Which if you follow the second line of logic in your post, the Ogryns can't comply with.

Without restricting to three Tallarn units, you could pick a Tallarn Gorgon, two Tallarn one man units, and somehow bring 16 Ogryns along for the ride - a little more than 'three Tallarn units", no? That is surely not the intent or the RAW wording of the rule. I don't believe this is how it operates.

sorry but no.

the transport must have rules that impart an ability on the unit embarked within it for them to function.

same as the "Drop Pod Assault" does..

same as the "open topped" rule does

same as the "firing deck" rule does.

no where in the rules does it ever state an ability given to one unit transfers to another unit simply because its emabarked within it..no where. As you can see within the rules of each transport "Datasheet" there must be an "Ability" that allows a unit embarked to do something.

What is the embarked unit doing in this case?

 JohnnyHell wrote:

 Silentz wrote:
I'm really torn on this. I have always read it as being like BCB explains... but I can see the other argument now.

The fulcrum of the argument (and the reason I don't think we can resolve it) is...

WITHOUT ambush, I pick a unit to set up on the battlefield. It's a transport, so I can tuck other stuff in it as per the rules.

WITH ambush, I pick three units to set up in ambush. One's a transport, but I now can't tuck stuff in it unless I've also chosen them as one of my 3 with the stratagem.

I don't see that there's enough evidence in the rules either way. You can argue that the standard 40k rules for transports take precedence... or you can argue that the words "pick three units" take precedence. Both sound right.

Aye, and muddying the waters: "Choose up to three Tallarn units to setup in ambush instead of placing them on the battlefield."

So not three units, three specifically Tallarn units. Which if you follow the second line of logic in your post, the Ogryns can't comply with.

Without restricting to three Tallarn units, you could pick a Tallarn Gorgon, two Tallarn one man units, and somehow bring 16 Ogryns along for the ride - a little more than 'three Tallarn units", no? That is surely not the intent or the RAW wording of the rule. I don't believe this is how it operates.

Actually the Ambush Strat is pretty clear on its intent on how its worded. The intent is the Strat only wants 3 units the ability to go in reserve..hence the "pick 3 Tallarn units" part. If you try to give that same "ability" the the units embarked within it... (which it doesn allow btw) you could essentially allow up to 40 additional models of multiple combinations (the Stormlord capacity) to go into reserve as well. Clearly not the intent of the Strat.

 zedsdead wrote:

 JohnnyHell wrote:

 Silentz wrote:
I'm really torn on this. I have always read it as being like BCB explains... but I can see the other argument now.

The fulcrum of the argument (and the reason I don't think we can resolve it) is...

WITHOUT ambush, I pick a unit to set up on the battlefield. It's a transport, so I can tuck other stuff in it as per the rules.

WITH ambush, I pick three units to set up in ambush. One's a transport, but I now can't tuck stuff in it unless I've also chosen them as one of my 3 with the stratagem.

I don't see that there's enough evidence in the rules either way. You can argue that the standard 40k rules for transports take precedence... or you can argue that the words "pick three units" take precedence. Both sound right.

Aye, and muddying the waters: "Choose up to three Tallarn units to setup in ambush instead of placing them on the battlefield."

So not three units, three specifically Tallarn units. Which if you follow the second line of logic in your post, the Ogryns can't comply with.

Without restricting to three Tallarn units, you could pick a Tallarn Gorgon, two Tallarn one man units, and somehow bring 16 Ogryns along for the ride - a little more than 'three Tallarn units", no? That is surely not the intent or the RAW wording of the rule. I don't believe this is how it operates.

Actually the Ambush Strat is pretty clear on its intent on how its worded. The intent is the Strat only wants 3 units the ability to go in reserve..hence the "pick 3 Tallarn units" part. If you try to give that same "ability" the the units embarked within it... (which it doesn allow btw) you could essentially allow up to 40 additional models of multiple combinations (the Stormlord capacity) to go into reserve.

I totally agree.

Read my other posts, I was outlining the absurd combos made possible by claiming you could fill a Tallarn transport with whatever you liked. BCB is fond of putting "RAW says" in his posts like that gives them unassailable credibility, even when he's just plain wrong. My Gorgon example was to show that.

Drager wrote:
What is the embarked unit doing in this case?

it cant be embarked in the first place . or to be honest the embarked unit would be lost since there is no "ability" for that unit to go into Ambush" and now sits in limbo having not been deployed earlier on the table.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 JohnnyHell wrote:

 zedsdead wrote:

 JohnnyHell wrote:

 Silentz wrote:
I'm really torn on this. I have always read it as being like BCB explains... but I can see the other argument now.

The fulcrum of the argument (and the reason I don't think we can resolve it) is...

WITHOUT ambush, I pick a unit to set up on the battlefield. It's a transport, so I can tuck other stuff in it as per the rules.

WITH ambush, I pick three units to set up in ambush. One's a transport, but I now can't tuck stuff in it unless I've also chosen them as one of my 3 with the stratagem.

I don't see that there's enough evidence in the rules either way. You can argue that the standard 40k rules for transports take precedence... or you can argue that the words "pick three units" take precedence. Both sound right.

Aye, and muddying the waters: "Choose up to three Tallarn units to setup in ambush instead of placing them on the battlefield."

So not three units, three specifically Tallarn units. Which if you follow the second line of logic in your post, the Ogryns can't comply with.

Without restricting to three Tallarn units, you could pick a Tallarn Gorgon, two Tallarn one man units, and somehow bring 16 Ogryns along for the ride - a little more than 'three Tallarn units", no? That is surely not the intent or the RAW wording of the rule. I don't believe this is how it operates.

Actually the Ambush Strat is pretty clear on its intent on how its worded. The intent is the Strat only wants 3 units the ability to go in reserve..hence the "pick 3 Tallarn units" part. If you try to give that same "ability" the the units embarked within it... (which it doesn allow btw) you could essentially allow up to 40 additional models of multiple combinations (the Stormlord capacity) to go into reserve.

I totally agree.

Read my other posts, I was outlining the absurd combos made possible by claiming you could fill a Tallarn transport with whatever you liked. BCB is fond of putting "RAW says" in his posts like that gives them unassailable credibility, even when he's just plain wrong. My Gorgon example was to show that.

correct, your right and i appreciate you stepping in to help further explian it

You are missing one thing. We don't give embarked units the Ambush rule. If we did then we could put "passangers" wholly within 7" of any battlefield edge and more than 9" from enemy models. Which is obviously not what we do.
Transports have ability to embark units during set up. Not during "set up on battlefield". Ambush is form of set up. Should work.
Also should be in FAQ.

 danyboy wrote:
You are missing one thing. We don't give embarked units the Ambush rule. If we did then we could put "passangers" wholly within 7" of any battlefield edge and more than 9" from enemy models. Which is obviously not what we do.
Transports have ability to embark units during set up. Not during "set up on battlefield". Ambush is form of set up. Should work.
Also should be in FAQ.

In my silly Gorgon-full-of-Ogryns example, how many Tallarn units am I Ambushing with?

- Three. One Gorgon, two dudes.

How many Ogryns am I deploying.

- Sixteen.

How many Ogryns does the Stratagem allow me to Ambush with?

- Zero. Uh-oh...

The Transport rules don't give you carte blanche to ignore other limits present in rules. They pertain to regular deployment and are not written to cover every special rule. Those special rules cover themselves. Here we have a limit of "three Tallarn units" which is fairly unambiguous. Saying I can bring 16 Ogryns along for the ride breaks that rule.

 JohnnyHell wrote:

xmbk wrote:
Agreed. But in this case, the rules do give you permission, the Designer's Commentary specifically so. GW has always struggled with consistent wording, so I'm not sure the Drop Pod rule means much in this case.

I'd love to see them FAQ this.

Can you show me where it says units without permission to begin off the board can do so? I haven't found anything that says that. There's a clause that says units in a transport count as one drop, but I can't find one allowing extra permissions. Always open to being wrong, just can't find anything of the sort!

The DC specifically states that embarked units do not count as separate deployment choices. They are merely placed in the transport, even when the transport is deployed somewhere other than the battlefield. They do not need permission to deploy in reserve, because they are not being deployed. They have permission to be placed in the transport, which is all that the rules require.

I would love to see the FAQ'd. The RAI are far from clear, but the RAW seems to favor this being legal.

(Thank you for making this a rules question, not a personal moral assault. )

xmbk wrote:

 JohnnyHell wrote:

xmbk wrote:
Agreed. But in this case, the rules do give you permission, the Designer's Commentary specifically so. GW has always struggled with consistent wording, so I'm not sure the Drop Pod rule means much in this case.

I'd love to see them FAQ this.

Can you show me where it says units without permission to begin off the board can do so? I haven't found anything that says that. There's a clause that says units in a transport count as one drop, but I can't find one allowing extra permissions. Always open to being wrong, just can't find anything of the sort!

The DC specifically states that embarked units do not count as separate deployment choices. They are merely placed in the transport, even when the transport is deployed somewhere other than the battlefield. They do not need permission to deploy in reserve, because they are not being deployed. They have permission to be placed in the transport, which is all that the rules require.

I would love to see the FAQ'd. The RAI are far from clear, but the RAW seems to favor this being legal.

In your view. The RAW prevents it for me. It could do with a revised FAQ. They already FAQ'd to prevent 9 Russes popping up. I'd imagine if they do re-FAQ we'll see "Go Go Ogryn Gorgon" type shenanigans being banned too.

TBH, the worst thing would be a Chimera full of Psykers. Psykers are demonstrably not Tallarn units. Yet you're claiming the RAW allows them to appear this way? I disagree. Three Tallarn units is something I read as a hard limit, specific to this rule, overriding normal permissions.

And no worries dude. It's always interesting to discuss!

xmbk wrote:

The DC specifically states that embarked units do not count as separate deployment choices. They are merely placed in the transport, even when the transport is deployed somewhere other than the battlefield. They do not need permission to deploy in reserve, because they are not being deployed. They have permission to be placed in the transport, which is all that the rules require.

I would love to see the FAQ'd. The RAI are far from clear, but the RAW seems to favor this being legal.

(Thank you for making this a rules question, not a personal moral assault. )

So, you are saying that its possible to put 39 ogryns in 3 stormlords (13 in each) and put them in ambush ?? I dont think so.

p5freak wrote:

xmbk wrote:

The DC specifically states that embarked units do not count as separate deployment choices. They are merely placed in the transport, even when the transport is deployed somewhere other than the battlefield. They do not need permission to deploy in reserve, because they are not being deployed. They have permission to be placed in the transport, which is all that the rules require.

I would love to see the FAQ'd. The RAI are far from clear, but the RAW seems to favor this being legal.

(Thank you for making this a rules question, not a personal moral assault. )

So, you are saying that its possible to put 39 ogryns in 3 stormlords (13 in each) and put them in ambush ?? I dont think so.

I don't think so, you can only take one vehicle.

Drager wrote:

p5freak wrote:

xmbk wrote:

The DC specifically states that embarked units do not count as separate deployment choices. They are merely placed in the transport, even when the transport is deployed somewhere other than the battlefield. They do not need permission to deploy in reserve, because they are not being deployed. They have permission to be placed in the transport, which is all that the rules require.

I would love to see the FAQ'd. The RAI are far from clear, but the RAW seems to favor this being legal.

(Thank you for making this a rules question, not a personal moral assault. )

So, you are saying that its possible to put 39 ogryns in 3 stormlords (13 in each) and put them in ambush ?? I dont think so.

I don't think so, you can only take one vehicle.

*One vehicle unit. (as per FAQ)

 JohnnyHell wrote:

Drager wrote:

p5freak wrote:

xmbk wrote:

The DC specifically states that embarked units do not count as separate deployment choices. They are merely placed in the transport, even when the transport is deployed somewhere other than the battlefield. They do not need permission to deploy in reserve, because they are not being deployed. They have permission to be placed in the transport, which is all that the rules require.

I would love to see the FAQ'd. The RAI are far from clear, but the RAW seems to favor this being legal.

(Thank you for making this a rules question, not a personal moral assault. )

So, you are saying that its possible to put 39 ogryns in 3 stormlords (13 in each) and put them in ambush ?? I dont think so.

I don't think so, you can only take one vehicle.

*One vehicle unit. (as per FAQ)

3 Stormlords aren't one vehicle unit right? I'm not a guard player.

I’ve pinged the GW Facebook team some time ago on this issue. We will have to see if it gets clarified.

I consider the drop pod orbital assault rule enough of a guideline to not stick an extra 8 or 10 units into a Tallaran Stormlord and claim it’s one pick. But that doesn’t mean GW made that explicit in the rules.

I forgot about the one vehicle restriction.

p5freak wrote:

xmbk wrote:

The DC specifically states that embarked units do not count as separate deployment choices. They are merely placed in the transport, even when the transport is deployed somewhere other than the battlefield. They do not need permission to deploy in reserve, because they are not being deployed. They have permission to be placed in the transport, which is all that the rules require.

I would love to see the FAQ'd. The RAI are far from clear, but the RAW seems to favor this being legal.

(Thank you for making this a rules question, not a personal moral assault. )

So, you are saying that its possible to put 39 ogryns in 3 stormlords (13 in each) and put them in ambush ?? I dont think so.

For 9 CP and roughly 2500 points, plus the 9 units you would need deployed regularly. So in a 3k game. Is that really a big deal?

I would point out that Eldar can also do this, with Cloudstrike. They can drop 36 Spiritseers in 3 Wave Serpents. That wouldn't involve any concern over regiment word shenanigans.

Different rules differently worded don't help really. Eldar can do it doesn't mean Tallarn can.

 JohnnyHell wrote:
Different rules differently worded don't help really. Eldar can do it doesn't mean Tallarn can.

Agreed. It was in reference to the concerns of intent. A bunch of DS Primaris psykers is fundamentally the same as a bunch of Spiritseers.

Considering you can absolutely DS 3 Baneblades, I don't understand the concern over cargo. I'm ok with leaving this as something that could really use FAQ clarification.

Wouldn't be surprised if they amended Ambush to just one use.

xmbk wrote:

 JohnnyHell wrote:
Different rules differently worded don't help really. Eldar can do it doesn't mean Tallarn can.

Agreed. It was in reference to the concerns of intent. A bunch of DS Primaris psykers is fundamentally the same as a bunch of Spiritseers.

Considering you can absolutely DS 3 Baneblades, I don't understand the concern over cargo. I'm ok with leaving this as something that could really use FAQ clarification.

Wouldn't be surprised if they amended Ambush to just one use.

You can't use it on three Baneblades. Thee Russes, yes, but Baneblades are single-model units, so a single Baneblade would be the one vehicle unit the FAQ allows.

EDIT: oh I see, you mean play the Strat three times? Yuck.

Yea you could basically burn 9cp to ambush 3 baneblades. Unfortunately even 3 barebones ones will break the 50% rule in a 2k game. I would be more than happy to see my opponent go through so many cp in one shot. Running 3 of them means the best case you are getting 7-8 cp.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

xmbk wrote:

 JohnnyHell wrote:
Different rules differently worded don't help really. Eldar can do it doesn't mean Tallarn can.

Agreed. It was in reference to the concerns of intent. A bunch of DS Primaris psykers is fundamentally the same as a bunch of Spiritseers.

Considering you can absolutely DS 3 Baneblades, I don't understand the concern over cargo. I'm ok with leaving this as something that could really use FAQ clarification.

Wouldn't be surprised if they amended Ambush to just one use.

It really doesn't need a FAQ. It's pretty clear that without a special "ability" such as the drop pod rule for example the only ability that a Stormlord gives its occupants is the "open firing deck" rule.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 danyboy wrote:
You are missing one thing. We don't give embarked units the Ambush rule. If we did then we could put "passangers" wholly within 7" of any battlefield edge and more than 9" from enemy models. Which is obviously not what we do.
Transports have ability to embark units during set up. Not during "set up on battlefield". Ambush is form of set up. Should work.
Also should be in FAQ.

Actually that's really not how it works. Take for instance the drop pod. It's the "drop pod assault " ability built within the drop pods data slate that allows units embarked to be held in reserve.. Without it.. Embarked units can't go in it. Ambush given to a transport only effects the transport. If the transport doesn't have an ability that allows a unit embarked to be held in reserve... It can't be.

It's the data slate lack of ability that restricts it.

What 50% rule? You can easily drop 3 tanks and have more units on the field.

As for the FAQ, you should read the thread. It doesn't need to give the units special deployment rules, because they aren't deployed.

RAI vs RAW is pretty clear here.

If we go by BaconCatBugs signature, then apparently the entire game is unworkable RAW.

So given the choice between A, and B, I think we'd best pick A, yes?

The problem there is Wave Serpents. If this is RAI then Wave Serpents can't DS with units in them. I strongly question that is the RAI.

Too often people think RAI is clear, and that the guy disagreeing with them is a rules lawyer (though some people clearly are). The RAI is unclear, the RAW favors allowing it, it needs an FAQ.

RAW, 'deployment choice' and 'units' are two different things.

'Deployment choice' is what we commonly refer to as a 'drop' - say a valkyrie has three units of command squad embarked it in at deployment.
This is a single 'deployment choice' comprised of four (4) units: one (1) valkyrie and three (3) command squad.

Ambush stratagem is clear on the wording that 'three tallarn units' and not 'three tallarn deployment choices'. Clearly, while non-tallarn units may embark on a tallarn vehicle, the said tallarn vehicle with non-tallarn units may not use Ambush as the non-tallarn units are ineligible targets of the stratagem. It doesn't even need to go into 'where is the locale of the embarked units' and 'do transports endow abilities to its contents" argument.

Really, it's not a discussion of RAI vs RAW - there's no room for alternate interpretation.

xmbk wrote:
What 50% rule? You can easily drop 3 tanks and have more units on the field.

As for the FAQ, you should read the thread. It doesn't need to give the units special deployment rules, because they aren't deployed.

This is correct. I was thinking points and not units..my mistake.

Ihowever i find it pretty hard for a army to field a super heavy detatchement of baneblades,and a battalion getting 9cp. But if you can... Go for it. I would to see,you burn through all of your command points.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 skchsan wrote:
RAW, 'deployment choice' and 'units' are two different things.

'Deployment choice' is what we commonly refer to as a 'drop' - say a valkyrie has three units of command squad embarked it in at deployment.
This is a single 'deployment choice' comprised of four (4) units: one (1) valkyrie and three (3) command squad.

Ambush stratagem is clear on the wording that 'three tallarn units' and not 'three tallarn deployment choices'. Clearly, while non-tallarn units may embark on a tallarn vehicle, the said tallarn vehicle with non-tallarn units may not use Ambush as the non-tallarn units are ineligible targets of the stratagem.

Really, it's not a discussion of RAI vs RAW.

Exactly


Automatically Appended Next Post:

xmbk wrote:
The problem there is Wave Serpents. If this is RAI then Wave Serpents can't DS with units in them. I strongly question that is the RAI.

Too often people think RAI is clear, and that the guy disagreeing with them is a rules lawyer (though some people clearly are). The RAI is unclear, the RAW favors allowing it, it needs an FAQ.

Incorrect.

The cloud strike strat spacifically mentions if the wave serpent is used as a transport the units inside can go there. The Tallern strat has no such allowance.

I mean really... Sheesh only players trying to bend the rule to meet there needs are making this simple thing an issue. I get it.. You want RAI to allow it...however it doesn't by clear RAW.which is RAI

So I'm making it an issue to bend to my needs as a guy with no IG? I simply think the raw allows it. I even posted my explanation as a syllogism when I was told it was fallacious. I've not seen a convincing argument to disallow RAW and only shaky ones for RAI.

Drager wrote:
So I'm making it an issue to bend to my needs as a guy with no IG? I simply think the raw allows it. I even posted my explanation as a syllogism when I was told it was fallacious. I've not seen a convincing argument to disallow RAW and only shaky ones for RAI.

Three Tallarn units. Where does the Stratagem allow any more than these three, specifically Tallarn, units to be deployed in Ambush? It doesn't. That's not RAI or shaky. That's solid RAW, sorry. RAW is not remotely unclear as it says "three Tallarn units".

Yes. The passengers are deployed on the vehicle. Not ambushing. I understand your argument I simply disagree. Do you understand mine?