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.

Dadavester wrote:
"Units in a transport cannot be affect in any way"

This does not work with the FAQ that states,

"Q: If a transport moves, do any models embarked inside it count
as also having moved?
A: Yes"

So can units be affected whilst in transports or can they not?

If the Answer is "Yes, they can," which imo the FAQ implies, then they keep the -1 from moving.

This says if a transport moves. But it didnt say what happens if the transport moved before the unit embarks. When the unit gets inside the transport stands still.

But, i agree, it implies if the transport moves, an already embarked unit would suffer -1 to hit for moving.

 p5freak wrote:



This says if a transport moves. But it didnt say what happens if the transport moved before the unit embarks. When the unit gets inside the transport stands still.

But, i agree, it implies if the transport moves, an already embarked unit would suffer -1 to hit for moving.

"Q: If a transport moves, do any models embarked inside it count
as also having moved?
A: Yes"

If the Transport moves before the unit embarks, did the transport move? Yes, you say? Then it absolutely does tell you what happens when the transport moves before the unit embarks. The unit counts as moving.

If the unit moves before embarking, it suffers the -1. Its part of the Heavy rule. "If a model with a Heavy Weapon moved in the preceeding movement phase..." We're not talking about Rites of Battle, or a psychic power, etc. It's a basic rule of shooting with a Heavy Weapon.

There are 2 ways to interpret this imo, the transport rules below.

“Embarked units cannot normally do anything or be affected in any way whilst they are embarked. Unless specifically stated, abilities that affect other units within a certain range have no effect whilst the unit that has the ability is embarked.”
The way I read this is that units embarked on a transport cannot normally be affected in anyway, so abilities, auras and such cannot affect the unit.

“Open-topped: Models embarked on this model can attack in their shooting phase, measure the range and draw line of sight from any point on this model. When they do so, any restrictions or modifiers that apply to this model also apply to its passengers; for example, the passengers cannot shoot if this model Fell Back in the same turn, Cannot shoot except for pistols if this model is within 1” of an enemy unit, and so no.”
This allows a unit to shoot, and the rule specifies that passengers CAN be affected by modifiers. Nowhere does the open topped rule says it overrules normal shooting rules. Nowhere does it state a model moving and embarking on a transport is counted as not moving.

“Q:if a transport moves, do any models embarked inside it count as also having moved?
A: Yes
This FAQ shows that units CAN be affected, even if there is no Open-Topped rule.”

The open-topped rule allows you to attack in the shooting phase. A shooting attack takes into account the weapons Type EG Rapid fire, Heavy, Assault, Pistol. Because a unit CAN be affected, as shown above, a model that has moved and embarked onto a transport and then shoots a heavy weapon will shoot with -1.
By your interpretation an OC plasma rolling 1’s does not die, a unit that advanced into a transport can fire RF and fire Heavy weapons and Assault weapons with no penalty.

p5freak regularly and deliberately misapplies one part of the transport rules, don’t sweat it.

 p5freak wrote:

Dadavester wrote:
"Units in a transport cannot be affect in any way"

This does not work with the FAQ that states,

"Q: If a transport moves, do any models embarked inside it count
as also having moved?
A: Yes"

So can units be affected whilst in transports or can they not?

If the Answer is "Yes, they can," which imo the FAQ implies, then they keep the -1 from moving.

This says if a transport moves. But it didnt say what happens if the transport moved before the unit embarks. When the unit gets inside the transport stands still.

But, i agree, it implies if the transport moves, an already embarked unit would suffer -1 to hit for moving.

Would you agree, by extension that a unit which can shoot must also use the rules involved in shooting?

In this example (which you have agreed with) the unit counts as moved - the FAQ ruling doesn't mention anything about open-topped. You've agreed that, if a unit counts as having moved, it wil lsuffer the -1 to hit with heavy weapons, even if it's in a vehicle - despite this not actually being referenced in the FAQ.

By your previous argument, the unit would count as moving, but not suffer the penalty as this counts as being "affected".

Having seen the FAQ saying that units in transports can be affected by the basic rules, would you agree that the correct interpretation is that which allows them to be?

 some bloke wrote:

 p5freak wrote:

Dadavester wrote:
"Units in a transport cannot be affect in any way"

This does not work with the FAQ that states,

"Q: If a transport moves, do any models embarked inside it count
as also having moved?
A: Yes"

So can units be affected whilst in transports or can they not?

If the Answer is "Yes, they can," which imo the FAQ implies, then they keep the -1 from moving.

This says if a transport moves. But it didnt say what happens if the transport moved before the unit embarks. When the unit gets inside the transport stands still.

But, i agree, it implies if the transport moves, an already embarked unit would suffer -1 to hit for moving.

Would you agree, by extension that a unit which can shoot must also use the rules involved in shooting?

In this example (which you have agreed with) the unit counts as moved - the FAQ ruling doesn't mention anything about open-topped. You've agreed that, if a unit counts as having moved, it wil lsuffer the -1 to hit with heavy weapons, even if it's in a vehicle - despite this not actually being referenced in the FAQ.

By your previous argument, the unit would count as moving, but not suffer the penalty as this counts as being "affected".

Having seen the FAQ saying that units in transports can be affected by the basic rules, would you agree that the correct interpretation is that which allows them to be?

If i understand you correctly you are saying that the unit would count as moving, but not be affected by the -1 as it counts as being affected?

If this is what you saying i disagree 100%. The unit cannot NORMALLY be affected. Do not miss this word as it is key. Open topped is not normal as it allows the unit to shoot, therefore it can be affected by modifiers and such.

Dadavester wrote:

Spoiler:

 some bloke wrote:

 p5freak wrote:

Dadavester wrote:
"Units in a transport cannot be affect in any way"

This does not work with the FAQ that states,

"Q: If a transport moves, do any models embarked inside it count
as also having moved?
A: Yes"

So can units be affected whilst in transports or can they not?

If the Answer is "Yes, they can," which imo the FAQ implies, then they keep the -1 from moving.

This says if a transport moves. But it didnt say what happens if the transport moved before the unit embarks. When the unit gets inside the transport stands still.

But, i agree, it implies if the transport moves, an already embarked unit would suffer -1 to hit for moving.

Would you agree, by extension that a unit which can shoot must also use the rules involved in shooting?

In this example (which you have agreed with) the unit counts as moved - the FAQ ruling doesn't mention anything about open-topped. You've agreed that, if a unit counts as having moved, it wil lsuffer the -1 to hit with heavy weapons, even if it's in a vehicle - despite this not actually being referenced in the FAQ.

By your previous argument, the unit would count as moving, but not suffer the penalty as this counts as being "affected".

Having seen the FAQ saying that units in transports can be affected by the basic rules, would you agree that the correct interpretation is that which allows them to be?

If i understand you correctly you are saying that the unit would count as moving, but not be affected by the -1 as it counts as being affected?

If this is what you saying i disagree 100%. The unit cannot NORMALLY be affected. Do not miss this word as it is key. Open topped is not normal as it allows the unit to shoot, therefore it can be affected by modifiers and such.

No, I agree with you. I'm saying that this is what I expected from the other side of the discussion, and wish to see if this has swayed anyone's opinion on the topic.

 some bloke wrote:

Dadavester wrote:

Spoiler:

 some bloke wrote:

 p5freak wrote:

Dadavester wrote:
"Units in a transport cannot be affect in any way"

This does not work with the FAQ that states,

"Q: If a transport moves, do any models embarked inside it count
as also having moved?
A: Yes"

So can units be affected whilst in transports or can they not?

If the Answer is "Yes, they can," which imo the FAQ implies, then they keep the -1 from moving.

This says if a transport moves. But it didnt say what happens if the transport moved before the unit embarks. When the unit gets inside the transport stands still.

But, i agree, it implies if the transport moves, an already embarked unit would suffer -1 to hit for moving.

Would you agree, by extension that a unit which can shoot must also use the rules involved in shooting?

In this example (which you have agreed with) the unit counts as moved - the FAQ ruling doesn't mention anything about open-topped. You've agreed that, if a unit counts as having moved, it wil lsuffer the -1 to hit with heavy weapons, even if it's in a vehicle - despite this not actually being referenced in the FAQ.

By your previous argument, the unit would count as moving, but not suffer the penalty as this counts as being "affected".

Having seen the FAQ saying that units in transports can be affected by the basic rules, would you agree that the correct interpretation is that which allows them to be?

If i understand you correctly you are saying that the unit would count as moving, but not be affected by the -1 as it counts as being affected?

If this is what you saying i disagree 100%. The unit cannot NORMALLY be affected. Do not miss this word as it is key. Open topped is not normal as it allows the unit to shoot, therefore it can be affected by modifiers and such.

No, I agree with you. I'm saying that this is what I expected from the other side of the discussion, and wish to see if this has swayed anyone's opinion on the topic.

Ah ok, fair enough.

Another way to think of it is Normally it is not affected. Normally the unit cannot shoot, so open topped is abnormal and as such they can now be affected as it is not a normal situation.

Its not even being affected by anything. You aren't affected by core rules, you just follow them.

You're affected by psychic powers, some other transport exploding, or leader auras, not the basic rules of the game.

So, who decides which of the rules no longer count as "anything" because of Open-Topped? Cuz, the rule itself states specific exceptions to "normally cannot do or be affected in anyway", but the general consensus is that we should also exempt anything that affects shooting. Which is fine, but where do you draw the line?

Can I use Stratagems on an Embarked Unit with Open-Topped, because they can only "normally" not get to do so? What about auras and the like? Doesn't make sense that a vehicle that is literally "open" stops Auras like a wall, both inside and out? What about using Psyker Powers? Does it make sense that a unit can shoot from a Transport, but a guy can't just point his finger at someone?

Honestly, I believe Open-Topped should have been written as "a unit Embarked within this vehicle can act and be affected as though it is on the field (measurable range and LOS from the vehicle). Weapon attacks which target this unit have -1 to-hit and the embarked unit can utilize the vehicle's Toughness and Save characteristics, or their own, whichever is better.

You're not affected by the Emergency Disembarking rule when your transport is destroyed.

You're not affected by the normal Transport rules when you voluntarily disembark.

Following the Core Rules isn't an effect.

Nothing in the Transport rules states "effect". They say "anything". But, remember that the Core Rules also include stratagems, auras, fighting, and psychic powers. As well as many other things which, I believe, folks would agree that the Open-Topped rule disallows.

As I stated earlier, me and my group also play by the "generally accepted" rules everyone else has brought up. But I also recognize that, in doing so, we aren't playing it by RAW. Because, in this instance as in many others, GW created a situation in which RAW doesn't reflect what we believe to be the intent of the rule.

 flandarz wrote:
So, who decides which of the rules no longer count as "anything" because of Open-Topped? Cuz, the rule itself states specific exceptions to "normally cannot do or be affected in anyway", but the general consensus is that we should also exempt anything that affects shooting. Which is fine, but where do you draw the line?

Can I use Stratagems on an Embarked Unit with Open-Topped, because they can only "normally" not get to do so? What about auras and the like? Doesn't make sense that a vehicle that is literally "open" stops Auras like a wall, both inside and out? What about using Psyker Powers? Does it make sense that a unit can shoot from a Transport, but a guy can't just point his finger at someone?

Honestly, I believe Open-Topped should have been written as "a unit Embarked within this vehicle can act and be affected as though it is on the field (measurable range and LOS from the vehicle). Weapon attacks which target this unit have -1 to-hit and the embarked unit can utilize the vehicle's Toughness and Save characteristics, or their own, whichever is better.

Aura's are specified in the rule and as such do not affect the unit. There is a separate sentence negating them in the transport rule. Psyker power can only be cast when the Psyker is on the board, so cannot be done in a transport. Strats can only be cast on units on the board as well, unless stated, so the unit is on the board and cannot be affected.

Open-topped gives you permission to shoot. You follow all the rules from shooting, including modifiers. so you get -1 from moving and -1 for attacking flyers.

Its nothing to do with "deciding" what no longer counts, its simply following the shooting rules as you are allowed to shoot.

The Open-Topped rules explicitly gives permission for an embarked unit to attack in the Shooting Phase, but makes no mention of anything that would affect shooting being able to "ignore" the "cannot be affected" clause of the Transport rule. In fact, it lists specific ways in which restrictions and modifiers "pass" to the embarked unit from the vehicle it's Embarked in, rather than using their own restrictions and modifiers. If it started with "An Embarked unit may attack in the shooting phase as if it were on the field..." then the RAW would support your case. Unfortunately, it never gives you permission to treat them as if they are "in play" except in regards to attacking in the shooting phase. Therefore, the Transport Rules still apply to anything that isn't just "attacking", including not being affected by "anything".

Again, not how I play it, but that's how the RAW reads. And as BCB will be quick to point out, 40k is a permissive ruleset in which you're only allowed to do the things the rules say you can. Which, again, includes applying restrictions and modifiers to a unit that is not on the field of play.

Flanderz is absolutely correct here. The rules we have here are clear, regardless of how unintuitive they may seem to be.

Open Topped rules state that models firing from inside vehicles suffer the same penalties/bonuses to firing as the vehicle itself. It says nothing about pre-existing penalties, or penalties from moving and then embarking, it only specifies penalties from the vehicle the unit is now considered to be within.

Therefore, the unit would, bizarrely, not suffer any penalty if it moved, embarked, then fired a heavy weapon from an open topped vehicle that had itself not moved. The rules are permissive. Here the rules clearly tell us what modifiers exist to what units.

Is it intuitive? No.
Does it seem a bit "beardy"? Yes.
Are there a ton of other rule interactions just as unintuitive and beardy as this one? Yes.

 flandarz wrote:
The Open-Topped rules explicitly gives permission for an embarked unit to attack in the Shooting Phase, but makes no mention of anything that would affect shooting being able to "ignore" the "cannot be affected" clause of the Transport rule. In fact, it lists specific ways in which restrictions and modifiers "pass" to the embarked unit from the vehicle it's Embarked in, rather than using their own restrictions and modifiers. If it started with "An Embarked unit may attack in the shooting phase as if it were on the field..." then the RAW would support your case. Unfortunately, it never gives you permission to treat them as if they are "in play" except in regards to attacking in the shooting phase. Therefore, the Transport Rules still apply to anything that isn't just "attacking", including not being affected by "anything".

Again, not how I play it, but that's how the RAW reads. And as BCB will be quick to point out, 40k is a permissive ruleset in which you're only allowed to do the things the rules say you can. Which, again, includes applying restrictions and modifiers to a unit that is not on the field of play.

Again you are completely ignoring the word NORMALLY in the transport rule.

A unit embarked cannot normally do anything or be affected in any way. So normally a unit cannot shoot. Open-topped overrides this rule giving it permission to shoot. You now follow the rules for shooting in which Heavy weapons have a -1 to hit for moving. Stating that the unit cannot be affected and thus does not suffer the -1 one, is completely ignoring the normally. Shooting is not normal for an embarked unit so the second part of the rule does not apply.

To play it your way is to say that,
1's on OC plasma doesn't kill the model.
RF and heavy weapons can fire if the unit has advanced + embarked upon a transport.
Assault weapons do not suffer the -1 if advanced and embarked.
Flyers can be hit without penalty from within an open topped transport.

If you play it the other way it plays normally.

I'm not ignoring anything. In fact, I stated that Open-Topped provides specific exceptions to what would "normally" be the case for the unit. Anything that doesn't fall under those exceptions remains under the "can't do or be affected by this" clause. Otherwise, you open yourself up to plenty of shenanigans with a claim that Open-Topped means the Embarked unit doesn't fall under "normally" anymore. Like, a Freeboota Unit that is Embarked proccing a +1, even though it isn't on the field.

And, again, not how I play it. My stance is the same as always: the RAW provides a common framework for all players, but it shouldn't get in the way of having a good time. In this case, I don't like that the RAW isn't "realistic", so I use what appears to be the commonly accepted stance on it. Doesn't make it RAW, but it's certainly HIWPI.

Btw: the Flyer example is a poor one, as Open-Topped explicitly says that modifiers that affect the Transport affect the Embarked Unit, and the Transport is 100% affected by a Flyer's penalty to hit rolls.

The FAQ calls out that any effect affecting a transport does not extend to its passengers.

Hard to Hit is an ability which affects enemy units targetting it. Therefore, Hard to Hit does not apply to units shooting out from open topped vehicle.

Normally, yes. But Hard to Hit applies a Modifier. And, per Open-Topped, those are extended to the Embarked Unit.

Yes, but the transport itself never declared an attack, only its passengers.

And nothing can affect thr passengers except for those that are affecting the transport it is in.

Hmm.. fair enough. Point conceded.

"normally" is just referring to the fact that it is being affected by the open topped rule. I.e. normally models do not have the open topped rule.. doesn't say it is being affected by anything else. The rules aren't giving you permission for them to be affected by anything else. Who are you to draw arbitrary lines on what "normally" implies... with a permissive rule set we need to read what IS happening, not what we think should be happening.

I.e. off the battlefield models can not be affected in anyway. Time and time again we see this in the rules. No prayers for dark apostles, no continuing to shoot with its other weapons once a model is removed via dieing in the shooting phase from plasma, and no -1 to hit penalty is on the model, if the model was removed. This is the RAW. you can't just decide this one set of affects doesn't count but the rest do.

"normally" a model can not be affected in anyway when it is off the battlefield... but the open top rule makes it so they can. The open topped rule conveniently outlines how it affects the off the battlefield models. What it does not mention in those convenient set of non-"normal" permissions is that a model get's negative modifiers for its own movement.. it only says that a model gets negative modifiers for the vehicles movement.

If it worked the way you guys are suggesting, then if both my vehicle advanced and my model advanced then assault weapons would be hitting with -2 ?

The raw is really clear on this... again, its not a nice way to play, it does exploit the rules, but it IS the RAW.

 Type40 wrote:
Who are you to draw arbitrary lines on what "normally" implies... with a permissive rule set we need to read what IS happening, not what we think should be happening.

It's precisely this lack of information that we're referring to as a "gap in the RAW".

There's not enough information to even make out what open topped rule does exactly. This is starkly different than the other RAW oddity that's constantly being brought up regarding firing assault weapons after advancing (a case of one rule directly contradicting another).

The claim that "well, we're going to take 'not affected in any way' to mean LITERALLY ALL APPLICABLE rules other than being able to 'make attacks in the shooting phase'" in itself is an interpretation of the written text. You've chosen to interpret it in a sense literal to a fault, which results in various other loopholes and breaks in various other rules.

Your example of 'this happened at a tourney' is explicit example of a 'house rule' regarding the lack of clear wording on the rule. It's how you play it, not what the rule says because the written portion of this rule is incomplete because the 'Specific' in this 'General vs. Specific' isn't being specific enough to override the clauses in the general.

ANY =! ALL. Any is a non-specific deteminer.

 skchsan wrote:

 Type40 wrote:
Who are you to draw arbitrary lines on what "normally" implies... with a permissive rule set we need to read what IS happening, not what we think should be happening.

It's precisely this lack of information that we're referring to as a "gap in the RAW".

There's not enough information to even make out what open topped rule does exactly. This is starkly different than the other RAW oddity that's constantly being brought up regarding firing assault weapons after advancing (a case of one rule directly contradicting another).

The claim that "well, we're going to take 'not affected in any way' to mean LITERALLY ALL APPLICABLE rules other than being able to 'make attacks in the shooting phase'" in itself is an interpretation of the written text. You've chosen to interpret it in a sense literal to a fault, which results in various other loopholes and breaks in various other rules.

Your example of 'this happened at a tourney' is explicit example of a 'house rule' regarding the lack of clear wording on the rule. It's how you play it, not what the rule says because the written portion of this rule is incomplete.

The point many of here are trying to make is that there is no discernible RAW regarding this rule.

I am talking about RAW here, and we apply "not affected in any way" to literally every other related effect... so why not this one ?
There isn't a lack of information, in terms of RAW, all applicable information is right there.

If being off the battlefield didn't say the word "normally" that would cause a problem for rules that do explicitly say they affect models off the battlefield. The only reason "normally" is even mentioned there is because there are rules like opened topped that do affect models that are off the battlefield in the explicitly stated ways.

How is this being literal to a fault. This doesn't cause a game break, it doesn't cause a syntax error, it is what it is. The only way for it to apply the way you are suggesting is to add a non-existent house rule to the game saying it does. This isn't a result of lack of information, its a result of a lack of information supporting YOUR house rule... Just because the game doesn't work the way you think it should doesn't mean there is a lack of information due to it not explicitly saying what YOU think it should... have you thought for a second that maybe it isn't an oversight, maybe this was the intentional RAW, maybe it is the way the intended it to be played ? How do you know it isn't ? who are you to tell everyone that you have some special insight about a rule that wasn't actually written down.
We are talking about RAW here, not HIWP. It's fine to not like a rule and play it differently if your opponent agrees. But for you to come here saying that this RAW is incomplete because you think it should be played differently is quite frankly a bit funny. It would be like me saying "my harlies always wound on a 2+ , you just don't know it because the rules on my shooting are incomplete"

Ok, so would you agree that units firing from an open-topped vehicle would follow, and ONLY FOLLOW, the rules governing making 'attacks in the shooting phase' (found in pg 5-7 of battleprimer)?

Yes absolutely.

Each model gets to shoot the weapons they have on their datasheet. Each model gets to use any abilities on their datasheet. (as confirmed by the Starweaver entry stating rising cresendo still works)
But the models are not affected by movement modifiers, as they do not exist, they are not on the battlefield and are not affected in anyway. In the same way, I can not use an example made on a deathjester sitting in a starweaver... as he can not be affected in anyway. Even though he meets all the requirments for the strategem. It would affect him in some way. So I can't do it. movement modifiers would affect the model in someway, so they arn't applied, the model isn't on the battlefield, it doesn't exist for the purpose of game rules.

So, I go ahead and measure range from the vehicle, check the unaffected datasheet for unaffected abilities on the weapon/model. I start the shooting sequence.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Its quite simple really... You ask,,, does this rule or ability change something about the model I am shooting with or does it affect an ability or rule related to the model... if the answer is yes... then it doesnt happen.. if the answer is "no, my model is doing what it always does, is unchanged from it's datasheet and has no modifiers being applied to it" then it is "A" ok and allowed by RAW.

 Type40 wrote:
Yes absolutely.

Each model gets to shoot the weapons they have on their datasheet. Each model gets to use any abilities on their datasheet. (as confirmed by the Starweaver entry stating rising cresendo still works)
But the models are not affected by movement modifiers, as they do not exist, they are not on the battlefield and are not affected in anyway. In the same way, I can not use an example made on a deathjester sitting in a starweaver... as he can not be affected in anyway. Even though he meets all the requirments for the strategem. It would affect him in some way. So I can't do it. movement modifiers would affect the model in someway, so they arn't applied, the model isn't on the battlefield, it doesn't exist for the purpose of game rules.

So, I go ahead and measure range from the vehicle, check the unaffected datasheet for unaffected abilities on the weapon/model. I start the shooting sequence.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Its quite simple really... You ask,,, does this rule or ability change something about the model I am shooting with or does it affect an ability or rule related to the model... if the answer is yes... then it doesnt happen.. if the answer is "no, my model is doing what it always does, is unchanged from it's datasheet and has no modifiers being applied to it" then it is "A" ok and allowed by RAW.

Entertain me here a bit - I'm going to try and be as literal as you are being.

Firing heavy weapon specifically asks you to confirm whether the model with the heavy weapon moved in the preceding movement phase. If a model is not on the battlefield and cannot be accountable for any reasonable rules interactions, how would you check if the model has moved or not? The only thing affecting the units inside is the clause 'any restrictions or modifiers that apply to this model also apply to its passengers'. It does not say explicitly, thereby giving you permission in a permissive ruleset, to count the transport's movement in the preceding movement phase as if it's the unit embarked's own. If there are no model on the battlefield to check for it's state of its preceding movement, then models embarked cannot fire with their heavy weapons because it cannot be checked.

Going further, the rules for open topped says 'any restrictions or modifiers that apply to this model also apply to its passengers'. According to the rules in the shooting phase section of the rule, "each type of ranged weapon also has an additional rule that, depending upon the situation, might affect the accuracy of the weapon or when it can be fired." What does it mean exactly, when the transport follows the rules for a heavy weapon where it states "if a model [Open-topped transport] with a Heavy weapon moved in its preceding Movement phase, you must subtract 1 from any hit rolls made when firing that weapon this turn" tries to fire with HB it is equipped with? If it moves, it must subtract 1 from any hit rolls made when firing with the said HB. So now, the effect that which "restricts" and applies "modifiers" to the said transport is "The transport must subtract 1 from to hit rolls made when firing the HB" - according to the open topped rule, the same now applies to the passengers. Now the passengers are subject to the same restriction where it "must subtract 1 from to hit rolls made when firing the HB." What if the unit has another heavy weapon (which the transport does not have) and is trying to shoot with it? The restriction for shooting for the transport applies only to the weapons it is equipped with, because the rules for shooting with heavy weapon does not say "if this model fires any heavy weapon, then subtract 1 from all hits rolls fired from all heavy weapons".

Where are we drawing the conclusion, strictly from the written rule, that passengers embarked on an open topped transport subtract 1 when firing A heavy weapon? The rule is quite specific that it is checked on a model-by-model basis. You cannot carry over the check for the transport onto it's passengers, particularly so because the embarked models are not on the battlefield, therefore it cannot be checked.

What do we do then? What if the transport doesn't have any heavy weapons equipped, and therefore cannot be required to check if the model moved or not for the purpose of firing a heavy weapon. Can the units inside (which does not exist on the battlefield for any rules purpose) fire their heavy weapons?

We don't need these pages of obscure examples and ridiculous theorems.

The rules here are clear.

The only ambiguity is from those who seem to misunderstand what a permissive rule set means and what it allows us to do.

Units in open topped vehicles follow the rules for open topped vehicles. Those rules state only that modifiers that affect the vehicle effect the passenger when they fire. This is what we do when resolving this ruling.

/thread right?

 An Actual Englishman wrote:
We don't need these pages of obscure examples and ridiculous theorems.

The rules here are clear.

The only ambiguity is from those who seem to misunderstand what a permissive rule set means and what it allows us to do.

Units in open topped vehicles follow the rules for open topped vehicles. Those rules state only that modifiers that affect the vehicle effect the passenger when they fire. This is what we do when resolving this ruling.

/thread right?

I don't see how this is an obscure example. It is quite literal.

All I'm trying to get across here is that your camp's school of thought is just another interpretation of RAW and not THE RAW (the actual rule as written, not once-interpreted rule as written) because rule as literally written doesn't work.

 skchsan wrote:

 Type40 wrote:
Yes absolutely.

Each model gets to shoot the weapons they have on their datasheet. Each model gets to use any abilities on their datasheet. (as confirmed by the Starweaver entry stating rising cresendo still works)
But the models are not affected by movement modifiers, as they do not exist, they are not on the battlefield and are not affected in anyway. In the same way, I can not use an example made on a deathjester sitting in a starweaver... as he can not be affected in anyway. Even though he meets all the requirments for the strategem. It would affect him in some way. So I can't do it. movement modifiers would affect the model in someway, so they arn't applied, the model isn't on the battlefield, it doesn't exist for the purpose of game rules.

So, I go ahead and measure range from the vehicle, check the unaffected datasheet for unaffected abilities on the weapon/model. I start the shooting sequence.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Its quite simple really... You ask,,, does this rule or ability change something about the model I am shooting with or does it affect an ability or rule related to the model... if the answer is yes... then it doesnt happen.. if the answer is "no, my model is doing what it always does, is unchanged from it's datasheet and has no modifiers being applied to it" then it is "A" ok and allowed by RAW.

Entertain me here a bit - I'm going to try and be as literal as you are being.

Firing heavy weapon specifically asks you to confirm whether the model with the heavy weapon moved in the preceding movement phase. If a model is not on the battlefield and cannot be accountable for any reasonable rules interactions, how would you check if the model has moved or not? The only thing affecting the units inside is the clause 'any restrictions or modifiers that apply to this model also apply to its passengers'. It does not say explicitly, thereby giving you permission in a permissive ruleset, to count the transport's movement in the preceding movement phase as if it's the unit embarked's own. If there are no model on the battlefield to check for it's state of its preceding movement, then models embarked cannot fire with their heavy weapons because it cannot be checked.

Going further, the rules for open topped says 'any restrictions or modifiers that apply to this model also apply to its passengers'. According to the rules in the shooting phase section of the rule, "each type of ranged weapon also has an additional rule that, depending upon the situation, might affect the accuracy of the weapon or when it can be fired." What does it mean exactly, when the transport follows the rules for a heavy weapon where it states "if a model [Open-topped transport] with a Heavy weapon moved in its preceding Movement phase, you must subtract 1 from any hit rolls made when firing that weapon this turn" tries to fire with HB it is equipped with? If it moves, it must subtract 1 from any hit rolls made when firing with the said HB. So now, the effect that which "restricts" and applies "modifiers" to the said transport is "The transport must subtract 1 from to hit rolls made when firing the HB" - according to the open topped rule, the same now applies to the passengers. Now the passengers are subject to the same restriction where it "must subtract 1 from to hit rolls made when firing the HB." What if the unit has another heavy weapon (which the transport does not have) and is trying to shoot with it? The restriction for shooting for the transport applies only to the weapons it is equipped with, because the rules for shooting with heavy weapon does not say "if this model fires any heavy weapon, then subtract 1 from all hits rolls fired from all heavy weapons".

Where are we drawing the conclusion, strictly from the written rule, that passengers embarked on an open topped transport subtract 1 when firing A heavy weapon? The rule is quite specific that it is checked on a model-by-model basis. You cannot carry over the check for the transport onto it's passengers, particularly so because the embarked models are not on the battlefield, therefore it cannot be checked.

What do we do then? What if the transport doesn't have any heavy weapons equipped, and therefore cannot be required to check if the model moved or not for the purpose of firing a heavy weapon. Can the units inside (which does not exist on the battlefield for any rules purpose) fire their heavy weapons?

You are getting confused about what it means to be "affected"
You clearly just follow the rules written on open top... did the transport move,,, heavy weapons -1 to hit... not hard, that's simply what it says.

Again ask, "does the rule/ability change the models datasheet in anyway" ? and then ask, "does the rule/ability affect anything the model does in anyway" ?
If the answer is yes, then the model is not affected. Simple that's what the RAW is.

Then you read the open topped rule, check your UNAFFECTED datasheet and continue to shoot. Are you trying to suggest that movement penalties/restrictions on weapons don't affect the the way they work ? Because that's even more confusing.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 skchsan wrote:

 An Actual Englishman wrote:
We don't need these pages of obscure examples and ridiculous theorems.

The rules here are clear.

The only ambiguity is from those who seem to misunderstand what a permissive rule set means and what it allows us to do.

Units in open topped vehicles follow the rules for open topped vehicles. Those rules state only that modifiers that affect the vehicle effect the passenger when they fire. This is what we do when resolving this ruling.

/thread right?

I don't see how this is an obscure example. It is quite literal.

All I'm trying to get across here is that your camp's school of thought is just another interpretation of RAW and not THE RAW (the actual rule as written, not once-interpreted rule as written) because rule as literally written doesn't work.

Except they do work,,,, just not the way you think they should XD.