Consolidate into Transports...

[Amayasu]

Hey all,

 

So I think this is allowed, based on the rules as written, but may be unintentional.

 

Either way it's cool, but potentially potent.

 

Drive a Land Raider up to an enemy unit.

 

Charge the LR to soak Overwatch.

 

Charge an assault unit into the same target unit.

 

Do some fightin'

 

Consolidate the assault unit, keeping within 3" of the LR, and then Embark the LR.

 

Embarking rules state that after a move, a unit within 3" can Embark, and the Consolidation rules state that you simply make a move 3" towards the nearest enemy.

 

So, with careful placement, can you consolidate into a transport?

 

Cheers.

[Acebaur]

Pretty sure the FAQ said no to this.

 

Edit: I'm wrong about the FAQ but I still think the answer is no.

Edited July 19, 2017 by Acebaur

[Toasterfree]

embarking and disembarking is part of the movement phase, by the time you have assaulted you have passed that step

[Amayasu]

embarking and disembarking is part of the movement phase, by the time you have assaulted you have passed that step

 

Thing is though, the rules don't state that. It states that disembarking is done at the end of the movement phase. Embarking is done at the end of a move.

 

While I don't have strong feelings on whether it should or should not be allowed, the rules do seem to support it.

 

It came up at a local event recently, and we allowed it.

[Brother Casman]

I'm leaning towards "no" for the simple reason that getting into a transport doesn't "[end] the move closer to enemy models". If your model is in a transport - it's removed from the battlefield, and can't be considered "closer to enemy models".

[Jacinda]

OK ... here goes.

 

There are two ways to embark on a transport.  First is to be deployed in the trasport before the game starts.  Second:

"Embark: If all models in a unit end their move within 3" of a friendly transport, they can embark within it.
Remove the unit from the battlefield and place it to one side – it is now embarked inside the transport."

 

This is obviously allowed by the movement you make in the movement phase.  When you cosolidate, you also m\ove.

6. Consolidate
You may move each model in the unit up to 3" – this move can be in any direction so long as the model ends the move closer to the nearest enemy model.

 

The big block here tho is the requirement to be closer to the nearest enemy model.  Being removed from the battlefield means you cannot be closer to the neasest enemy model.  On the other hand, The uniit CAN end it's consolidate move closer to the enemy and be within 3" of a transport.  The embarcation happens after the move ends.

 

Consolidate is done closer to enemy?  Check. 

Ends its move?  Check.

Within 3" of transport?  Check.

 

**** ponders ****

OK, so embarking is allowed if they did indeed move closer to the nearest enemy and are also within 3" of the transport.

 

**** thinks some more ****

Not the way I think it should be played but as far as RAW, I don't see a reason not to.

 

I also am not finding the old rule that a unit cannot embark and disembark in the same turn.  Of couse this means you could disembark to charge then consolidate next to the vehicle and embark to hide from the enemies retaliation only to disembark and charge again on your next turn.

 

One more caviate, if you cannot move closer to the nearest enemy (already in base to base for example) then you cannot consolidate; so no move; so no embark.

 

Am I missing anything?  I think it is possible to embark after a consolidation move in that there is no ruke against it, it's just highly unlikely.

[Eddie Orlock]

I also am not finding the old rule that a unit cannot embark and disembark in the same turn.

Pg. 183, TRANSPORTS sidebar, first paragraph of the sidebar, last sentence. Specific prohibition on both embarking and disembarking in the same turn.

One more caviate, if you cannot move closer to the nearest enemy (already in base to base for example) then you cannot consolidate; so no move; so no embark.

Maybe, but let's not forget that the same rules also govern the movement of the transport. So, conceivably possible to first shimmy the transport over toward it's intended passengers in such a fashion that they could micro-step away from it toward a distant foe yet still be in range to embark on their impulse. I think there's even an argument that models locked in base contact could still contend a zero inch move that if undertaken might end within three inches of the transport and enable an extraction.

 

Tangential argument, the embarkation rules talk about the net position after all the models in the units move, while the pile in and consolidation rules talk about the models moves. One girl in the back shuffles and this allows the unit to count as moving and thus eligible for embarkation?

Am I missing anything?  I think it is possible to embark after a consolidation move in that there is no ruke against it, it's just highly unlikely.

Only big thing that seems overlooked is that you can't do it all in the same turn, but perhaps perversely you might be able to embark as an abuse of the first 'pile in' move on your opponents turn if the embarking action isn't considered specifically part of the movement proper but as an addendum to it. Not quite sure why you'd do it on a pile in and not a consolidate, but stopping rules musings to question 'why' is not really the province of the OR.

 

Consider this with a repressor (or other unit that you can fire while embarked upon, stormlord?) and a squad of sisters. Drive up and burnninate something. Charge survivors. Select them for your first action on the other players turn. Do a micro-motion move that leaves them within 3" of the repressor parked immediately behind them. Embark upon the transport to extract from the combat. Strand opponents assault unit in the open and possibly just drive away at the start of your turn, or indeed just disembark and act normally.

 

Actually, this could be the secret clever sauce to using faith to start a round of combat at the start of your turn, 'passion' into the APC to avoid the restrictions and caveats incurred by 'hand of the emperor'ing away?

 

Of course, now we're wandering off the question of is this possible and the intricacies associated with it and over into the related tactica which are probably better discussed elsewhere.

[Amayasu]

So GW have answered it, but not anywhere you'd expect to look... this should really be in the main FAQ under Transports.

 

https://17890-presscdn-0-51-pagely.netdna-ssl.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/06/Warhammer_40000_Stepping_into_a_New_Edition_of_Warhammer_40000_ENG.pdf

 

Q. Can I embark within a transport at any time

other than in the Movement phase, such as following
a consolidate move that takes a unit within 3" of
a transport?

A. No. You may only embark within or disembark a transport in the Movement phase, unless a rule or ability explicitly says otherwise. 

Edited July 19, 2017 by Amayasu

[Jacinda]

 

Pg. 183, TRANSPORTS sidebar, first paragraph of the sidebar, last sentence. Specific prohibition on both embarking and disembarking in the same turn.

 

Thanks!  How did I miss that?  I knew it was there but must have read over it every time. :\

 

It is an interesting question in any case.  Unintentional I am sure but since since a unit can embark when all models "ends their move" near a transport and both consolidate and pile in say a unit must "end its move" closer there is no denying that they are a form of move.  And since the embark is after the move (not a part of the move) it passes the closer to enemy check.

[Eddie Orlock]

@Jacinda: Amayasu's cited an FAQ that kills the whole thing.

 

Ugh. Too many FAQ documents. It was a nice dream while we had it, but on the plus side I now get to make an addendum to a prior thread.

 

At least this interpretation feels consistent with the interpretation that 'fighting' is not 'attacking' and that a model needs to 'fight', not just 'attack' to trigger things like bonus chainsword swings. Now we're just overloading the term 'move' with a formal definition for some rules references that excludes the common definition used in other areas of the rules. Overloaded words are where our most persistent troubles start down here, I'd've preferred to allow the shenanigans.