Official ruling for Drop Pods being immobile?

[Bloody Legionnaire]

Has there been an FAQ or official ruling on whether or not Legion Drop Pods are considered "immobile units?"

There was a lot of talk about the Space Wolves 'Bloodied Claws' RoW which states no immobile units as a RoW limitation.

 

However, after glancing over the Word Bearer's 'Last of the Serrated Sun' RoW it states infantry units must be deployed via deep strike in a Drop Pod and then has the same 'no immobile units' in the RoWs limitations.

There were some arguments that because Drop Pods have to Deep Strike and land somewhere on the table that RAI Drop Pods are not effectively immobile units. Then there are the naysayers who claim Drop Pods are absolutely immobile units and cannot be taken. That would completely make the Last of the Serrated Sun RoW impossible to use. 

Edit:

The Drop Pod does include the "Immobile Special Rule" but in HH Book 1 the rules states, "Once it has been deployed, a Drop Pod cannot move, and counts as a vehicle that has suffered an irreparable immobilized result."

Based on that it doesn't appear to me, RAW or RAI, that Drop Pods are truly "immobile vehicles." Then again there are some gamers that refuse any logic or reason until an official FAQ provides a clear answer.

(DISCLAIMER) I personally have not encountered a stubborn opponent in these regards. It just the impression I get from the general consensus on B&C. 

[carlisimo]

Nothing official yet, but they actually have someone working on a FAQ that could come out within weeks, a year or two after we needed it.

 

Most of assume that units with “(Immobile)” in the unit type are disallowed but units with the special rule “Immobile” are not.

[Dantay VI]

Nothing official yet, but they actually have someone working on a FAQ that could come out within weeks, a year or two after we needed it.

 

Most of assume that units with “(Immobile)” in the unit type are disallowed but units with the special rule “Immobile” are not.

 

Awesome, is this an FAQ for the AOD: Astartes book? will the FAQ cover the issues with book 7?

[Supe robot gangster #1]

 

 

Nothing official yet, but they actually have someone working on a FAQ that could come out within weeks, a year or two after we needed it.

 

Most of assume that units with “(Immobile)” in the unit type are disallowed but units with the special rule “Immobile” are not.

Awesome, is this an FAQ for the AOD: Astartes book? will the FAQ cover the issues with book 7?

Hopefully it covers all the books that are out, there is a lot of stuff across the board that needs rectifying

[Gorgoff]

 

 

Nothing official yet, but they actually have someone working on a FAQ that could come out within weeks, a year or two after we needed it.

 

Most of assume that units with “(Immobile)” in the unit type are disallowed but units with the special rule “Immobile” are not.

Awesome, is this an FAQ for the AOD: Astartes book? will the FAQ cover the issues with book 7?

The rule dude said that a lot is to be done but unfortunately he hadn't any time so far, because they worked on Malevolence.

But now he has some spare time to concentrate on that Errata in which they not only clear some FAQ but will solve some problems with balancing and stuff of that nature. Veterans where specifically meantioned.

[carlisimo]

 

Nothing official yet, but they actually have someone working on a FAQ that could come out within weeks, a year or two after we needed it.

 

Most of assume that units with “(Immobile)” in the unit type are disallowed but units with the special rule “Immobile” are not.

 

Awesome, is this an FAQ for the AOD: Astartes book? will the FAQ cover the issues with book 7?

 

 

It's supposed to cover numerous books, but mostly the rulebook, army list books, and books 6-7 (I wouldn't be surprised if it didn't cover the Blood Angels and White Scars though, since they're getting revised rules "soon"). 

 

Anuj Malhotra, one of the rules guys, was on Facebook (in the Crusade and Heresy group, I think) asking for Rite of War rules questions.  During a Warhammer TV thing he also said that the FAQ would not try to balance things, only resolve mechanical discrepancies.  They want to handle those in red books.  That's unfortunate.  It's been implied that the team isn't officially allotted any time to spend on FAQs and it either happens on their own time or when there's a lull between projects (Anuj just finished writing his part of book 8).  Neil Wylie is involved too, he's just not as publicly visible.

[Enurta]

Drop Pods are not Immobile as that is a Unit Type and the RoW restrictions are referring to that unit type. They suffer the immobilization after they land and just unfortunately has the same name as the Unit Type. There are several RoW that unlock Drop Pods, but simultaneously ban Immobile units; seems a bit silly if it affected Drop Pods. If a RoW was to ban Drop Pods via the Immobile Special Rule it would be worded like how Sacrificial Offering is worded banning the use of units with the Immobile Special Rule.

[Hfran Morkai]

 

Anuj Malhotra, one of the rules guys, was on Facebook (in the Crusade and Heresy group, I think) asking for Rite of War rules questions.

Please tell me someone brought up Recon squads infiltrating in OA lists, makes sense and is fluffy.

[Gorgoff]

Drop Pods are not Immobile as that is a Unit Type and the RoW restrictions are referring to that unit type. They suffer the immobilization after they land and just unfortunately has the same name as the Unit Type. There are several RoW that unlock Drop Pods, but simultaneously ban Immobile units; seems a bit silly if it affected Drop Pods. If a RoW was to ban Drop Pods via the Immobile Special Rule it would be worded like how Sacrificial Offering is worded banning the use of units with the Immobile Special Rule.

That

[carlisimo]

 

 

Anuj Malhotra, one of the rules guys, was on Facebook (in the Crusade and Heresy group, I think) asking for Rite of War rules questions.

Please tell me someone brought up Recon squads infiltrating in OA lists, makes sense and is fluffy.

I don’t remember seeing that.

 

And I’m not sure they’re entertaining requests to change things that aren’t broken but could use more flavor.

[Hfran Morkai]

That's a shame. Really would have loved the official OK as it's so thematic. Guess I'll probably just have to hope my opponent is cool with it (I'll pay for an empty pod, which is also fluffy, we know empties were deployed by the Legions).

 

Not like I've not played since 5th ed or anything

[carlisimo]

I mean, you can still ask for it. Email FW’s customer service and they’ll forward it to the relevant people.

 

But they might consider that nuncio-voxes starting on the board make the rite too effective.

[Bloody Legionnaire]

It doesn't have the unit type but it does have the Immobile Special Rule... which is why I was concerned. You're saying having Immobile as a "special rule" does not make it an Immobile unit, because "immobile" is not listed under the "unit type?"

[Gorgoff]

It doesn't have the unit type but it does have the Immobile Special Rule... which is why I was concerned. You're saying having Immobile as a "special rule" does not make it an Immobile unit, because "immobile" is not listed under the "unit type?"

Read what Ernuta said.