God of War and "on the table"

[greymeister]

Does this count if he is riding inside a vehicle? I have been browsing through the rulebook and I didn't recognize seeing "on the table" defined well anywhere. I would assume yes but can't assume anything anymore with GW rules.

[Steelmage99]

A model inside a transport is considered "on the table".

 

Unfortunately the only proff we have of this is the absence of a sentence, rather than the presence of one.

In 4th edition there was a sentence that spoke to the effect of a transported model not being "on the table" if inside a transport. Such a sentence doesn't presents itself in 5th. Thus a model is "on the table".

 

One can also argue that since models can shoot from inside a vehicle, use wargear effects (such as KFF), capture/contest an objecture and use psychic powers, they must be on the table.

[Frosty the Pyro]

Indeed, on the table = not in reserve, not dead

[Race Bannon]

Yikes, is this what GW has done with their game? or is it our fault to worry about their rules like this. Yet, I must admit, that when i first looked at the rule I wondered if that part would cause problems. So far it hasn't on my end.

 

It's not a silly question to be sure.

[DevianID]

I must, as I often do, point to the embarking rules that state you remove from the table any embarked models. So no, Calgar in a transport is not on the table--however many people confuse embarked squads and count embarked models as 'on the table' because there are several special rules that allow specific actions to be taken by an embarked model.

 

This includes using some psychic powers, shooting from a fire point, using wargear that is allowed to be used from a vehicle like an ork KFF or chaos icon, and capturing an objective if the transport is within 3 inches. There is a whole slew of other things you can't do while in a transport... basicly anything that doesnt explicitly say it applies to embarked models does not apply to them. This is neither a good or bad thing, it is just different from footslogging models. No one complains, for example, that embarked squads cant be affected by the enemy, yet everyone asserts that embarked squads can fully effect the outside world--the rules dont change between the two, however.

 

That said, there is a trend in tournies that embarked models can use any and every ability they possess, regardless of explicit rules allowing this. If the events you attend play this way, then I recommend a stance 'dont rock the boat; do as others do.' It is kinda overpowered for any and all of the opponents abilities to work in vehicles but none of yours affect them, but that is how most people play it seems--no wonder mech is the #1 metagame.

 

So in summary, yes an embarked Calgar is not on the table, in fact he cant be thanks to the rules. However, almost nobody will say that 'God of War' will not apply when Calgar is embarked, or for that matter even in reserve... most will simply say it works till he dies.

[Steelmage99]

This includes using some psychic powers, shooting from a fire point, using wargear that is allowed to be used from a vehicle like an ork KFF or chaos icon, and capturing an objective if the transport is within 3 inches. There is a whole slew of other things you can't do while in a transport... basicly anything that doesnt explicitly say it applies to embarked models does not apply to them.

 

Can you mention "a whole slew" of those things? Not things they are specifically prohibited from doing because they are inside a transport, but because they are no longer "on the table".

 

Example; shooting after moving at cruising speed. The embarked passenger are indeed prohibited from shooting, but that has something to do with a special rule preventing them from doing so. Not wether they are "on the table" or not.

Am I making any sense with my request? :P

 

I disagree with your interpretation. I postulate that a unit inside a transport is allowed to do anything they would normally be able to (general rule) unless specifically told otherwise (specific rule).

[DevianID]

I disagree with your interpretation. I postulate that a unit inside a transport is allowed to do anything they would normally be able to (general rule) unless specifically told otherwise (specific rule).

 

Figure there are 3 phases in the game, right? Assume for each phase the unit in question is in a transport for the following:

 

Movement: cant move other than to disembark, and cant even disembark in some situations (flat out movement, nowhere to place models, ect.) Thus, if the squad is in the vehicle and does not disembark, not a single rule in the movement phase applies to them.

 

Shooting: 1 model is allowed to shoot per fire point of a non-open topped transport, using a different set of rules for determining LOS and range than regular 'on the board' infantry models firing. The rest of the squad can do nothing in the phase, regardless of attacks that may have unlimited range and/or no LOS required. Also, models can not shoot at all if the transport moves more than 6 inches, regardless of the 'on the board' special rules that would allow them to move their maximum distance, or at least more than 6 inches, and still shoot. Also, you can not go to ground or run, obviously, unlike almost every other model 'on the board' during the shooting phase.

 

Assault Phase: I cant think of a single rule in the assault phase that embarked models can do, everything only applies to models 'on the board.'

 

So I hope that illustrates that embarked models do not follow any of the general rules for moving, shooting, and assault, and that instead the only things they can do are all defined by special rules such as disembarking, firing from fire points, and using particular psychic powers.

[nighthawks]

the phrasing of rules for embarking, etc... using the words "remove from the table" or something to that effect, is not a checklist mechanic - it is simply a clarification that when "embarking" it's normally physically impossible to have the models aboard the vehicle due to space and, frequently, glued hatches. therefore, the models are "removed" to prevent the confusion that would result from their being left on the table in some location whilst in the transport in some other location - they cannot be in 2 places at once! they are "in" the transport, having embarked, which is on the table. thus they are on the table. this is one of the few physical abstractions involving models the game rules still require as so much of the rules has moved to TLOS etc... that makes the physical model more important than it had been. (other abstractions would be things such as area terrain)

 

if we parse the language of the rules, we won't get anything done. they simply aren't written well enough to allow for that level of scrutiny. do not treat the rules as a specific checklist, they are simply conversationally conferred ideas regarding a mechanic and a set of comparisons between imaginary forces. if most tournaments and players are reading a rule one way, odds are, no matter how well you understand the language, you will loose the debate - just as a terminator over run by 30 grots will loose the assault in spite of his vast superiority. accept it and follow the "when in rome" theory as DevianID suggests.

[Steelmage99]

I disagree with your interpretation. I postulate that a unit inside a transport is allowed to do anything they would normally be able to (general rule) unless specifically told otherwise (specific rule).

 

Figure there are 3 phases in the game, right? Assume for each phase the unit in question is in a transport for the following:

 

Movement: cant move other than to disembark, and cant even disembark in some situations (flat out movement, nowhere to place models, ect.) Thus, if the squad is in the vehicle and does not disembark, not a single rule in the movement phase applies to them.

 

Shooting: 1 model is allowed to shoot per fire point of a non-open topped transport, using a different set of rules for determining LOS and range than regular 'on the board' infantry models firing. The rest of the squad can do nothing in the phase, regardless of attacks that may have unlimited range and/or no LOS required. Also, models can not shoot at all if the transport moves more than 6 inches, regardless of the 'on the board' special rules that would allow them to move their maximum distance, or at least more than 6 inches, and still shoot. Also, you can not go to ground or run, obviously, unlike almost every other model 'on the board' during the shooting phase.

 

Assault Phase: I cant think of a single rule in the assault phase that embarked models can do, everything only applies to models 'on the board.'

 

So I hope that illustrates that embarked models do not follow any of the general rules for moving, shooting, and assault, and that instead the only things they can do are all defined by special rules such as disembarking, firing from fire points, and using particular psychic powers.

 

And you just proved my point. Thank you.

[DevianID]

I am confused... Steelmage you said

I disagree with your interpretation. I postulate that a unit inside a transport is allowed to do anything they would normally be able to (general rule) unless specifically told otherwise (specific rule).

then I showed that infact you cant do anything normal models would normally be able to do, and everything they can do is thanks to an added special rule saying they can that only pertains to embarked units. This is in exact contradiction to what you said, or so I thought, but then you said:

And you just proved my point. Thank you

 

I am confused... the rules I see support that there is 2 conditions for models in regards to regular rules, namely on the board or off the board. Additional rules apply to models that are off the board but embarked in a transport that allow them to fire in some circumstances, capture objectives, and use abilities that specificly say they work in a vehicle. In each case, though, the transport becomes the point of origin, not the models off the board, and the rules that on the board or off the board embarked models use are different from one another. While there is a trend to count them as 'on the board' to streamline the game, if the official question comes up as to what the rules say, then the official rules dont allow this.

 

Maybe a more telling way of saying this is this: If Marneus is in reserve, would you let him use God of War? Me, if I were playing against someone, I would of course let him use God of War no matter where Marneus is until I kill him, in a transport or reserve or whatever. However, if someone asked what the rules actually say, then I would say of course that 'on the table' is a terrible wording that prevents him from using the rule any time the actual Marneus Calgar model is not legally placed on the gaming surface.

[Legatus]

Steelmage99's interpretation, and I agree with him on that one, is that the unit inside the transport still can act as they usually could, but subject to the constraints the transport puts on them.

 

Movement:

Obvioulsy being inside a transport means the unit itself will not make a move while being inside that transport. You would have to look at other actions models would usually do during the movement phase and whether they could still perform them while being inside that transport. Like certain psychic powers.

 

Shooting:

Only a limited number of models can shoot because the transport only allows a limited number of models to shoot. It is not because all the other models do not count as being on the table.

 

Assault:

Models cannot assault from a transport because they are only allowed to voluntarily leave it during the movement phase. It is not because they do not count as being on the table.

 

The unit can only act in certain ways because being inside a transpot limits their actions, as specifically described in the transport rules, not because they don't count as being in play or on the board.

[Steelmage99]

Legatus puts it better than me.

 

All the actions the embarked squad is prevented from doing, are being done by specific limitations presented by the rules.

Any actions normally allowed, and not prohibited by a specific exception, are allowed.

 

In the case of an embarked unit that isn't many actions, but any of those not prohibited are allowed.

 

Devian, the reason I said; "you proved my point" is because you listed a series of specific exceptions to the normal rules. You did not prove that the unit isn't on the table.

[DevianID]

My point was that none of the examples I listed was specific examples in the rules for embarked units. IE, there is no rule saying that embarked units can not go to ground, the reason you can not go to ground is because while off the board in a transport you do not meet the criteria to go to ground (infantry on the table).

 

I cant find a rule that says embarked units are not allowed to go to ground, thus by your logic that you can do anything unless the rules say otherwise, embarked units can go to ground. That is why my statement and examples oppose yours. However, if there is a rule I missed in regards to going to ground, please point me in the right direction and I will agree with your interpretation.

 

Also, in regards to fire points, the rules are not 'models without a firepoint can not shoot' it is more like '1 model may shoot per firepoint.' The rules are permisive, and they grant permission to fire from a fire point. This means that without permission, you cant shoot. And the reason you dont have permission to shoot normally, unlike models actually on the board, is because you are embarked on a vehicle, and thus removed from independant play on the board. I mean, the reason you are in the transport is because you WANTED to be removed from the table in the first place, to take advantage of the benefits of being off the board in a vehicle.

 

Even fluff could be argued that soldiers cramped inside a metal coffin bouncing across the battlefield have a hard time seeing the course of the battle and directing/inspiring their troops. Fluff has no place in rules, but since the rules are absolute that models in a transport are not physically on the board, we probably stopped arguing what the rules actually say a while ago, and instead are arguing intentions of how the rules should be changed to work better.

[Legatus]

I cant find a rule that says embarked units are not allowed to go to ground, thus by your logic that you can do anything unless the rules say otherwise, embarked units can go to ground. That is why my statement and examples oppose yours. However, if there is a rule I missed in regards to going to ground, please point me in the right direction and I will agree with your interpretation.

As per the rules for 'Going to Ground' on page 24, going to ground is a response that a unit can perform after an enemy unit has rolled to hit and wound against it. A unit inside a transport can not be the target of enemy shooting and cannot be hit by scattering templates either, so the opponent will not roll to hit or wound with any shooting attack against the unit inside the transport, so they will not have the opportunity to go to ground as a response.

 

Also, in regards to fire points, the rules are not 'models without a firepoint can not shoot' it is more like '1 model may shoot per firepoint.' The rules are permisive, and they grant permission to fire from a fire point. This means that without permission, you cant shoot.

The rules on page 66 state: "Unless specified differently in the vehicle's entry, a single passenger may fire out of a fire point and the other transported models may not fire."

[Race Bannon]

Can we ask this be put in the "dice off" thread? It seems more like a contest of word-play between 3 people who insist their mastery of the English language is more correct than another.

 

Since GW has not graced us with their meaning of the phrase "on the table", then it can be argued (successfully) either way: physical model actually touching the actual playing board, or in play, not in reserve or dead.

 

Thus, it should be left to each player's gaming environment, and not solved here.

[Isiah]

Well if everyone agrees it should go in then it will. Personally I see no reason why GoW shouldn't still work with Calgar embarked. Technically he is still in play if not physically on the table – while off the table to me means dead or in reserve.

 

So it's not so much the issue of God of War, but as you say the precise restrictions imposed on models when in transports, ie whether they count as being "on the table" or not.

 

This has knock-on effects for other bonuses too like Sicarius' Rites of Battle that also uses the term "on the table".

 

Cheers

I

[Brother Gothard]

Disclaimer: I do not intend to step on any toes, not repeat any arguments, not to complicate things. This is merely intended as a 'cease and desist' argument, with the most courteous of aims.

 

I agree with Steelmage's interpretation (as well as those in the "yes" camp), however, the fact remains that Calgar's rule says "on the table." Since there is no rules reference to units in transports being "on the table," while there are many SPECIFIC references in FAQs and Codex to things that models not "on the table" but in vehicles that are "on the table" can do, it is simply a matter of objective fact, that when Calgar is in a transport, he is NOT "on the table."

 

Until it gets FAQ'd that God of War, like psychic powers and icons, works when Calgar is in a transport, this will not be the case.

 

I just want to add some evidence to the fact that this is CLEARLY an oversight on GW's behalf. Look at the rules for Tigurius: his Gift of Prescience rule states that "if your army contains" Tigurius, you may choose to re-roll your reserves rolls. This was clearly intended to say that even if Tigurius is in reserves, you can re-roll your reserves rolls. Yet Sicarius, Calgar, etc, have rules that prohibit their special talents being used until they have joined the battle. I hesitate to say it is obvious - but it is obvious, that GW did not intend "on the table" to apply to models with these kinds of rules being physically "on the table," but to have it mean "not in reserves and not dead."

 

However, it is a clear case of RAW - which is being used as the standard here, that Calgar's rule is both not FAQ'd and requires him to be "on the table." Moreover, we can all agree that, for the intents of the real life conditions of a metal model, when Calgar is in a transport, Calgar is not "on the table." Put these two sentences together, and you get the result that Calgar's rule may not be used when he is in a transport.

 

It is unfortunate, but, if you are right - and good things come to those who wait, it will be FAQ'd.

 

+edit+

 

Oh, and when concerns RAW, yes, some words and sentences are open to interpretation of meaning, but do not try to argue that "on the table" has any other meanings than being PHYSICALLY on the table. Be reasonable.

[Legatus]

"When the unit embarks, it is removed from the table and placed aside, making a note or otherwise marking that the unit is being transported (we find that placing one of teh unit's models on top of the transport works well!)."

- Rulebook, page 66, 'Embarking'

 

Appearently the "removing from the table" has absolutely no gaming implications at all, since all models of the unit can still act, as far as permitted by the respective transport they are in, and it is even suggested that you can arbitrarily chose one model from the unit that will still be physically present on the table.

 

The only reason why such a unit is "removed from the table" is because they are then supposed to have entered a fully enclosed vehicle, and it would be impossible to actually place the models inside said vehicle. The rules could hardly have described that the player is supposed to place all the models inside the transport they want to embark on to.

[Frosty the Pyro]

Yeah i was under the impresion that one of the changes from 4th to 5th was transported units count as on table, I will try and find where I got this impresion from. when I have access to my books later today.

[GTang]

It's removed from the table, but still on the table. :)

[Brother Gothard]

"When the unit embarks, it is removed from the table and placed aside, making a note or otherwise marking that the unit is being transported (we find that placing one of teh unit's models on top of the transport works well!)."

- Rulebook, page 66, 'Embarking'

 

Appearently the "removing from the table" has absolutely no gaming implications at all, since all models of the unit can still act, as far as permitted by the respective transport they are in, and it is even suggested that you can arbitrarily chose one model from the unit that will still be physically present on the table.

 

The only reason why such a unit is "removed from the table" is because they are then supposed to have entered a fully enclosed vehicle, and it would be impossible to actually place the models inside said vehicle. The rules could hardly have described that the player is supposed to place all the models inside the transport they want to embark on to.

That's right. And that's how we know it is an oversight. But that does not actually have any material impact on the discussion. "On the table," though we know it is INTENDED to mean "not in reserves and not dead," unfortunately DOES mean "physically on the table."

 

In some sense I see your arguments rising out of the "its not MY fault that GW cant write coherent rules" sentiment, but that's just unfortunately the case. They have badly fudged rules in the past (wasn't there something about certain terminators not actually having terminator armour, or their terminator armour not being usable with teleport homers, or something else?), and we just had to live with it until it got FAQ'd or the codex updated.

 

It doesn't change that the wording of these rules does mean that when in transports they dont work.

[Legatus]

So, simply elect Calgar/Sicarius to be placed on top of the transport as a counter for the unit inside and you're good.

[Brother Gothard]

I am not sure if even that would suffice, but that could be a workaround I suppose.

 

But is that really on the table? Its technically treated as impassable terrain, so he cannot legally be placed there for play purposes, can he? Is being in a spot you cannot be in counted as being "on the table"?

[Seahawk]

I could open up the top hatch on the rhino and literally place my Calgar/Sicarius in the transport (where it is) while simultaneously being on the table. Models can legally be in a transport, if not on top.

[Bobman]

I agree that he'd be 'on the table' for gaming purposes if not physically on the table. There are other examples in 5th where it would be considered so.

 

In my opinion this is a common sense thing.

 

As others have said you could put him on top to be physically there. Even if it's impassible the book says you can do it so he'd be 'on the table'.