Jump to content

Emergency Disembarkation


falldown

Recommended Posts

actually it does tell you to ignore it, maturin. thats how the disembark section starts out doesn't it? it says "you cannot disembark within 1" of an enemy model". it then says if enemy models are preventing you from disembarking, you may make an emergency disembark and place your unit anywhere within 2" of the hull....well if what your saying is true it would say "anywhere within 2" of the hull, as long as its not within 1" of the enemy", wouldn't it? i find it kind of odd that it would lead with "you can't disembark within 1" of the enemy" and then continue to say if you can't do this, you can emergency disembark anywhere within 2" of the hull. to me that is cut and dry.

 

The rulebook does make some assumptions about using standard English, and does not assume that they need to spell out and re-spell out all exceptions to the rules in every possible case. See dswanick's response to SeattleDV8 in the two posts above: dswanick points out the open-topped embarkation/disembarkation rules are for regular embarkation and disembarkation, where the 1" rule presumably still applies even though it is not specifically restated. Otherwise by your interpretation, KnowThyEnemy, you could disembark off of opentopped transports within 1" of enemy models (see SeattleDV8's post).

 

I don't see why having both rules apply is so counterintuitive. You can have an enemy squad preventing exit from a chimera's rear hatch thanks to the 1" rule - so the squad ED's and gets off at the front. The 1" rule is still in effect but the ED rule has prevented destruction of your unit. That's why GW inserted the rule into 5th ed. presumably.

 

I'll reiterate that my view is supported by the rules - in the very next sentence after the ED rule is laid out, the rulebook states "If even this disembarkation is impossible...." (emphasis mine). The rules reiterate that it is a disembarkation, and presumably subject to the regular rules of disembarkation. (Though this is where dswanick and I disagree).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'll reiterate that my view is supported by the rules - in the very next sentence after the ED rule is laid out, the rulebook states "If even this disembarkation is impossible...." (emphasis mine). The rules reiterate that it is a disembarkation, and presumably subject to the regular rules of disembarkation. (Though this is where dswanick and I disagree).

Yeah, and mostly on an interpretational issue.

- maturin (as I understand it) sees "If even this disembarkation is impossible" and interprets it to mean that ED is a subset of nD (normal Disembarking) and therefore beholden to all the rules of nD.

- I see "If even this disembarkation is impossible" and iterpret it to mean that ED is a seperate rule from nD and only beholden to its own explicitly stated rules (this disembarkation{ED} as opposed to that disembarkation{nD}).

Isn't Rules as Interpreted fun. :lol:

 

Unfortunately, these kinds of issues can almost never be resolved. Unless some new bit of information comes to light (or GW releases a clear and pertinent FAQ). So with that, guys, I thank you for the good debate on this. Even if no opinions have been changed about the rule, we are at least all much better informed on all the pertinent RAW and RAI and can better make our case in any future disputes on this issue.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.