Battle Brothers and the Draft FAQ

An interesting question came up in stevedestroyerofworlds' army list topic around whether Raiders from the Purge Coterie could be used by Grotesques from a Grotesquerie.

Most of this comes from the recent draft FAQ from Games Workshop on Battle Brothers transports.

I had assumed that being the same Faction meant the allies rules didn't apply, and there would be no issue with the Grotesques jumping in the Purge Coterie Raiders. However, it was pointed out that all factions are shown as being Battle Brothers with themselves in the matrix in the main rulebook, and the Corsairs rules have suggestions around alliance levels within their army lists, suggesting there is a norm of an alliance level between units or detachments of the same faction.

The word 'detachment' does not feature in the allies rules at all. So as far as I can see all Dark Eldar units in an army are either Battle Brothers, or the allies rules don't apply because they have the same Faction.

If the allies rules don't apply then the Grotesques can jump in the Raiders and all is well.

However, if the Grotesques and the Raiders are Battle Brothers things get messy thanks to the draft FAQ. To make things messier, if the Grotesques and Raiders are Battle Brothers, are say a unit of Kabalite Warriors Battle Brothers with their dedicated transport?

The FAQ wording is quite odd. When I first read it, I assumed it meant say Fire Dragons can't deploy in a Dark Eldar fast attack Raider. But the FAQ doesn't say 'Can units embark in a Battle Brothers' Transport vehicle during deployment?', although that seems to be the way most people are interpreting it.

It actually says:

GW Draft FAQ wrote:

Q: Can units that are Battle Brothers embark in each other's Transport vehicles during deployment?
A: No.

I'm not totally sure what that even means.

When they say "each other's Transport vehicles" does that mean the dedicated transports for the "units that are Battle Brothers"? If so that seems so obvious as to not need an entry in the FAQ.

Or do they mean "Can units [from different factions] that are Battle Brothers embark in each other's Transport vehicles [from the other faction] during deployment?"?

Or similar to the previous paragraph with factions replaced with detachments?

How do others think this should be played? Is it a vaguely worded clarification around dedicated transports that people have read too much into, or is the intent clearly to stop cross-faction, or possibly cross-detachment transporting?

I think that we should play it as we have been for the last 2 years, and allow all battle brothers to deploy in each other's transports until GW takes their head out of their butt and gives us a coherent, well-written FAQ that makes sense. Seriously, they need to stop letting interns who've never played the game write FAQs.

As sensible as that advice seems, if a tournament wants to use the draft FAQ, or in the event that question makes the final cut unchanged, what does it mean?

The only way the words they have written make sense to me would be if they were dealing with two units, each with a dedicated transport, and clarifying that you can't swap them during deployment. For example, if I have a Devastator Squad in a Drop Pod and Battle Sisters in an Immolator, can I deploy the Battle Sisters in the Drop Pod. The answer to that is obviously no, but didn't need any FAQ ruling.

That would have much less meaning and impact on list design and game play than the way the FAQ seems to be generally interpreted.

Right, which is why that interpretation will never be widely accepted. It does nothing, because we already had a straight up, clear rule that said other units couldn't start in a unit's dedicated transport unless they were an IC joinning that unit.

Kantalla wrote:

The word 'detachment' does not feature in the allies rules at all. So as far as I can see all Dark Eldar units in an army are either Battle Brothers, or the allies rules don't apply because they have the same Faction.

If the allies rules don't apply then the Grotesques can jump in the Raiders and all is well.

Then all is well - you are correct that its only Units that check allies rules for level of alliance.

Multiple detachments of the same faction can indeed embark on each others transports.

All the FAQ does is stops the cross over - writhguard in raiders or skitarii in drop pods between factions that are battle brothers though it does apply to all transports - not just dedicated

Betray - isn't that a bit of a dangerous assumption - that the FAQ needs to be making some kind of new ruling? They had an entry to say a psyker can't cast the same spell multiple times, despite it being clearly in the rulebook already.

Massaen - I get that the way you are describing it seems to be the common interpretation. I have problems actually interpreting the words they have written to match that interpretation.

I'm fine with the way you are suggesting interpreting allies. That means Dark Eldar don't use allies rules with other Dark Eldar, but do with any other Faction in the same army. It makes more sense to me that every unit has an alliance level with every other unit in the army, but at least that interpretation stops that FAQ causing silly issues within a single Faction army.

The trouble I have is with the interpretation of the words in the FAQ to somehow mean Factions:
Q: Can units that are Battle Brothers embark in each other's Transport vehicles during deployment?

For example, take two units that could be Battle Brothers, say a unit of Fire Dragons and a unit of Kabalite Warriors. Can those units embark in each other's Transport vehicles during deployment? Of course they can't - because their transport vehicles would be dedicated transports. If that is what they meant then the FAQ makes sense, but is painfully obvious.

How do you interpret "each other's Transport vehicles" from the sentence in the FAQ to mean any vehicle belonging to the other Faction?

Kantalla wrote:

How do you interpret "each other's Transport vehicles" from the sentence in the FAQ to mean any vehicle belonging to the other Faction?

You can't really. If you want a good answer you have to ask a good question and the question that the FAQ answered was terribly worded. I assume the query was supposed to be whether allies can embark on a transport belonging to another faction that they are battle brothers with (which they absolutely can according to the rulebook) but that's not what they asked.

You can't get the right answer to the wrong question...

Right, well, the way it's worded does bring to question whether different units from different detachments in the same faction are considered battle brothers, and if so, how this effects them, if at all.

I agree, it's all very poorly worded. Hopefully they do a better job with the wording in round 2.

As per page 126 under Levels of Alliance: 'The Allies Matrix below shows the levels of alliance between units that have different Factions in the same army.' (emphasis mine)

If you are dealing with two units from the same Faction, the Matrix is irrelevant so the whole 'Battle Brothers with your own faction' thing becomes a moot point.

Dra'al Nacht wrote:

As per page 126 under Levels of Alliance: 'The Allies Matrix below shows the levels of alliance between units that have different Factions in the same army.' (emphasis mine)

Then why does the alliance chart clearly show every faction being battle brothers with itself?

It's not clear.

BetrayTheWorld wrote:

Dra'al Nacht wrote:

As per page 126 under Levels of Alliance: 'The Allies Matrix below shows the levels of alliance between units that have different Factions in the same army.' (emphasis mine)

Then why does the alliance chart clearly show every faction being battle brothers with itself?

It's not clear.

It's irrelevant. You only need to refer to the Allies Matrix when you have units with DIFFERENT Factions.

Dra'al Nacht wrote:

BetrayTheWorld wrote:

Dra'al Nacht wrote:

As per page 126 under Levels of Alliance: 'The Allies Matrix below shows the levels of alliance between units that have different Factions in the same army.' (emphasis mine)

Then why does the alliance chart clearly show every faction being battle brothers with itself?

It's not clear.

It's irrelevant. You only need to refer to the Allies Matrix when you have units with DIFFERENT Factions.

I'm not saying you're wrong. You're right in the a rules lawyer sort of way when invoking various elements of understanding of typical arrangement of English language. However, it's not exactly irrelevent. It instead creates a paradox. I don't want to argue about right or wrong, because that's an unwinnable argument for either side. I'm just going to explain why with a quick example. This is essentially what is happening here. Below is your analogy:

Paradoxical Ruleset wrote:

Rule number 1 - You must follow ALL of the rules.
Rule number 2 - Ignore the next rule.
Rule number 3 - Do X.

Now, if you try to follow all the rules in the box above, you'll find that it's impossible to do so. Rule 1 says we have to follow all the rules, but we can't follow rule 1 because rule 2 says to ignore rule 3. So if we "Do X", we're breaking rule number 2 and rule number 1. If we DON'T "Do X", then we're breaking rule 3 and rule 1.

That's where we're at. The chart clearly shows factions as battle brothers to themselves, but the preceding text clearly says the allies matrix is for DIFFERENT factions in the same army.

Did they mean for the word "factions" to be "detachments" and just use the wrong word in the preceding text, or did they just fail to print the chart itself correctly? It's impossible to tell the intention, and thus is debatable.

Again, not saying you're wrong. I personally think you're probably right, but I don't know that any more than you do.

I agree with everything in Betray's statement AND saying you're wrong RAW. So Rawr. Fight me.

Note: as of right now I seem to be the one championing the opposition as I caused the initial question.

That's right amorrowlyday - it's all your fault.

I had originally thought there was no need to consider allies within a single faction, and do appreciate your pointing out that it isn't as clear cut as I thought it was. Then I re-read the words on the FAQ question, and I am struggling to read that the way most seem to interpret it. Hopefully it all gets fixed up when the final versions come out.

BetrayTheWorld wrote:

I think that we should play it as we have been for the last 2 years, and allow all battle brothers to deploy in each other's transports until GW takes their head out of their butt and gives us a coherent, well-written FAQ that makes sense. Seriously, they need to stop letting interns who've never played the game write FAQs.

Which rule is it that actually allows this though?

I can find no rule that allows you to deploy embarked unless it's in a Dedicated Transport purchased as an upgrade for that unit?

I find most of this thread mute, yes you can embark in any transport you like, BUT, this must me in the movement phase (BRB p80)

To deploy in a transport, it has to be a Dedicated Transport (BRB p81)

What am I missing guys?

Rewind wrote:

BetrayTheWorld wrote:

I think that we should play it as we have been for the last 2 years, and allow all battle brothers to deploy in each other's transports until GW takes their head out of their butt and gives us a coherent, well-written FAQ that makes sense. Seriously, they need to stop letting interns who've never played the game write FAQs.

Which rule is it that actually allows this though?

I can find no rule that allows you to deploy embarked unless it's in a Dedicated Transport purchased as an upgrade for that unit?

I find most of this thread mute, yes you can embark in any transport you like, BUT, this must me in the movement phase (BRB p80)

To deploy in a transport, it has to be a Dedicated Transport (BRB p81)

What am I missing guys?

From the Deployment section (strangely...)

Quote :

Whichever method you use, models must either deploy within their deployment zone, or be held back in Reserve. Models can be deployed ‘inside’ buildings, fortifications, or Transport vehicles in their deployment zone, subject to their Transport Capacity

Count Adhemar wrote:

From the Deployment section (strangely...)

Quote :

Whichever method you use, models must either deploy within their deployment zone, or be held back in Reserve. Models can be deployed ‘inside’ buildings, fortifications, or Transport vehicles in their deployment zone, subject to their Transport Capacity

Your quote is from a paragraph that just basically says, that you have to deploy within your deployment zone? It doesn't change the rules for transports, or what can go in them?

Rewind wrote:

Count Adhemar wrote:

From the Deployment section (strangely...)

Quote :

Whichever method you use, models must either deploy within their deployment zone, or be held back in Reserve. Models can be deployed ‘inside’ buildings, fortifications, or Transport vehicles in their deployment zone, subject to their Transport Capacity

Your quote is from a paragraph that just basically says, that you have to deploy within your deployment zone? It doesn't change the rules for transports, or what can go in them?

Not sure what you're trying to prove/disprove here. You said you couldn't find a rule that allows you to deploy embarked unless it's in a Dedicated Transport purchased as an upgrade for that unit. I showed you the rule that allows it.

Count Adhemar wrote:

Not sure what you're trying to prove/disprove here. You said you couldn't find a rule that allows you to deploy embarked unless it's in a Dedicated Transport purchased as an upgrade for that unit. I showed you the rule that allows it.

But your rule doesn't do that all at?

The rule you've quoted describes how you have to deploy within your deployment zone or put units in reserve? It doesn't change the Transport rules?

Yes you can deploy in vehicles, but, obviously still subject to the Transport rules?

You can only Embark or Disembark in the movement phase BRB p80

Until someone quotes a specific rule stating that you can embark into a transport before the game begins, you can't. The only rule I found to allow this, is the Dedicated Transport rule, which allows the unit that purchased the DT to deploy embarked in it.

Rewind wrote:

Count Adhemar wrote:

Not sure what you're trying to prove/disprove here. You said you couldn't find a rule that allows you to deploy embarked unless it's in a Dedicated Transport purchased as an upgrade for that unit. I showed you the rule that allows it.

But your rule doesn't do that all at?

Erm, yes it does. It specifically says "Models can be deployed ‘inside’ buildings, fortifications, or Transport vehicles".

Quote :

Until someone quotes a specific rule stating that you can embark into a transport before the game begins, you can't.

As I already have, this seems rather moot.

If it stated, "Models can be deployed inside buildings, fortification, or their Dedicated Transport vehicles" I would be inclined to agree with Rewind. With it just stating Transport vehicles and no statement actually stating in the book that it is prohibited, I have to go with Count Adhemar. Rules exist to tell us what we can't do, not what we can do, from a RAW perspective.

CurstAlchemist wrote:

If it stated, "Models can be deployed inside buildings, fortification, or their Dedicated Transport vehicles" I would be inclined to agree with Rewind. With it just stating Transport vehicles and no statement actually stating in the book that it is prohibited, I have to go with Count Adhemar. Rules exist to tell us what we can't do, not what we can do, from a RAW perspective.

The much quoted above rule, even with the change of wording, doesn't affect the rules on Embarking.

Which clearly state you can only Embark in the Movement Phase, or a unit with a DT can start embarked in it.

So yes, units can be deployed in vehicles, BUT, they would have to be Embarked 1st, which the rule doesn't give you the ability to do.

We specifically have a rule that states when you can Embark, there is no contradiction here in my opinion.

No, Rewind. Embarking is a verb to describe HOW you get "inside" something. If another rule gives us permission to START already inside something, there is no need to embark. The English language needs to be referenced, here, and common sense utilized.

It's not a made up, game-specific construct. It's an actual word OUTSIDE of 40k, and as such, you must reference what that word means outside of 40k to understand what they're saying INSIDE of 40k.

Agreed, I also think Rewind is incorrect about Deploying vs Embarking, However I stand by the grain of truth in their point as it furthers mine and thus the actual topic at hand:

You have by right the ability to deploy inside a vehicle within one's deployment zone. You also have a right to deploy in some subset of reserves, but you do not have the right to deploy in reserves inside a vehicle per the structure of the quote Count Adhemar provided.

amorrowlyday wrote:

you do not have the right to deploy in reserves inside a vehicle per the structure of the quote Count Adhemar provided.

I don't necessarily think this is true, as we're explicitely told we're allowed to do BOTH of those things, with nothing to indicate that we couldn't do both at the SAME time.