been too long since I last encountered this situation.
Necrons deepstrike with veil and are VERY close to the table edge. First circle of models cannot be completed. Mishap or rest of the unit killed?
Thanks for help guys

Mishap, as the DS'ing unit hit either an enemy unit, Edge of the board, Impassable terrain ETC

woops sorry was wrong. mishap

Thank you

And for page Reference its Deep Strike Mishaps PG 95 right hand side

In the situation you described, as long as the first model was on the board, and you fit as many models in the first circle that you can fit, you move on to the second circle, then to the third etc.

you only mishap if you are within 1 inch of an enemy, on top of a model, in impassible terrain, or off the board.

The brb P.95 says that "Each circle should include as many models as will fit"

So if you are next to impassible terrain, or the board edge, you include as many models as will fit in that circle, and move to the next circle.,

Operative word there is "circle" if you can not complete the circle and still have models then you mishap. You can't go on to the third circle until the second one is complete.

Boss GreenNutz wrote:Operative word there is "circle" if you can not complete the circle and still have models then you mishap. You can't go on to the third circle until the second one is complete.

I wholeheartedly agree with this statement as if you don't complete it than it's not a circle, and therefore a mishap.

I read it as you must complete the first circle or it's a mishap. It says you can make more circles after the first one is completed.

If that is the case what would stop me from completing the inner circle, placing one model and calling it the second circle then one beside it (extending outwards) calling it the 3rd and so on. It would be great if this was the case for me. I'd actually use Zaggstruk as it would all but guarantee he will never mishap and I'd always get the assault off with a mob of 15 Stormboyz.

Yes, and each circle must be completed before you can move to the next one. Any circle that is incomplete (while still having models to place) due to enemy models, board edge or impassable terrain results in a mishap.

"Each circle should include as many models as will fit." p.95

so if you have the initial model next to impassible terrain, lets say a friendly tank, and you can only place 4 models in the first circle that is "as many models as will fit" and you move to the second circle.

thus no mishap.

Boss GreenNutz wrote:If that is the case what would stop me from completing the inner circle, placing one model and calling it the second circle then one beside it (extending outwards) calling it the 3rd and so on.

The rule stating "Each circle should include as many models as will fit." p.95 is what stops you from placing 1 model and calling it.

DeathReaper wrote:"Each circle should include as many models as will fit." p.95

so if you have the initial model next to impassible terrain, lets say a friendly tank, and you can only place 4 models in the first circle that is "as many models as will fit" and you move to the second circle.

thus no mishap.

Boss GreenNutz wrote:If that is the case what would stop me from completing the inner circle, placing one model and calling it the second circle then one beside it (extending outwards) calling it the 3rd and so on.

The rule stating "Each circle should include as many models as will fit." p.95 is what stops you from placing 1 model and calling it.

Then it's not a circle though. I read it as talking about base size. You cannot fit as many terminators in each circle as you can regular infantry.

But it is a circle with as many models as will fit, since you cant fit anymore you move on to the next circle.

the circle is complete when there is no more room to place remaining models, in the case of impassible terrain this may make models begin another circle before the first one touches end to end.

Models can't ift but it is not a circle so you cannot go to the next circle until the previous one is finished.

DeathReaper wrote:But it is a circle with as many models as will fit, since you cant fit anymore you move on to the next circle.

the circle is complete when there is no more room to place remaining models, in the case of impassible terrain this may make models begin another circle before the first one touches end to end.

What you're describing is not a circle with as many models that will fit. You are describing the area of a circle with as many models in it as possible. Big difference.

If you can't complete the circle due to terrain / edge of board / enemy unit, then you mishap.

DR is describing a pie with a slice or few missing
As many models will fit describes how many models will fit in said circle.

What I am describing IS a circle with as many models as will fit.

The models that will fit are put in a circle around the first, then you move on to the second circle with as many models as will fit.

As long as it's a complete circle, yea we're all saying the same thing. No slices of pie missing until the last circle

Could be a circle as in group of persons.

jdjamesdean@mail.com wrote:As long as it's a complete circle, yea we're all saying the same thing. No slices of pie missing until the last circle

It is as complete as the rules allow for.

Which is as many models as will fit.

if that is 3 models because of impassible terrain or board edges, then so be it, the rules have been satisfied because that is as many models as will fit.

Maybe this needs its own thread..but is there any criteria for how the furthest outside circle is arranged? Say I complete my first and second circle and have two models remaining. Can I put one on the front of the second circle and one on the back (also touching the second circle, but not the other "third circle" model)? Or do the two "third circle" models have to be right next to each other?

I've always played it that the outermost, incomplete circle can include any number of gaps, but I'm not sure if that's entirely correct.

DeathReaper wrote:

jdjamesdean@mail.com wrote:As long as it's a complete circle, yea we're all saying the same thing. No slices of pie missing until the last circle

It is as complete as the rules allow for.

Which is as many models as will fit.

if that is 3 models because of impassible terrain or board edges, then so be it, the rules have been satisfied because that is as many models as will fit.

No sir that is not a Circle that is a pie missing some slices.

If you cannot complete a circle due to impassable terrain, enemy units, board edge, etc you will mishap.

The "each circle should include as many models as will fit" does not work as you are trying to say it does.

if you can fit 5 SM's in a circle around the center SM and Impassable Terrain Prevents 2/5 from being placed, they are Mishapped

As above

If you cannot place any models where they could go, were it not for impassable terrain / etc, then you mishap.

The rules allow for you to place as many models in the circle that will fit.

If you cant fit 6, and you can only fit 4 then you fit 4 and move to the next circle.

I think you are misreading the rule. Its talking about base size. As in fit as many as you can, so like 6 regular bases or 4 terminators. As others have said, DS rules state that if you cannot place ANY models for impassable terrain then it's a mishap.

And why cant you fit 6? Because of impassable terrain. You know, the stuff that causes mishaps?

DeathReaper wrote:What I am describing IS a circle with as many models as will fit.

The models that will fit are put in a circle around the first, then you move on to the second circle with as many models as will fit.

Let me guess. You also believe that a model that could not completely come on the table is considered to be on the table since part of it is....correct? As many models as will fit means how many you can place in a complete circle. You can get more 25MM bases in a circle than you can 40s or 60s.

Boss GreenNutz wrote:Let me guess. You also believe that a model that could not completely come on the table is considered to be on the table since part of it is....correct?

The exact opposite actually. I was in the if its not on (as in 100% on) then you have not moved onto the table.
As shown in This thread

Boss GreenNutz wrote:As many models as will fit means how many you can place in a complete circle. You can get more 25MM bases in a circle than you can 40s or 60s.

Right, and the rules allow for circles with as many models that will fit. so if that is a 4 model circle then you move to the next circle and get as many models as will fit in the next circle.

DeathReaper wrote:

Boss GreenNutz wrote:Let me guess. You also believe that a model that could not completely come on the table is considered to be on the table since part of it is....correct?

The exact opposite actually. I was in the if its not on (as in 100% on) then you have not moved onto the table.
As shown in This thread

Boss GreenNutz wrote:As many models as will fit means how many you can place in a complete circle. You can get more 25MM bases in a circle than you can 40s or 60s.

Right, and the rules allow for circles with as many models that will fit. so if that is a 4 model circle then you move to the next circle and get as many models as will fit in the next circle.

That's not true you can fit more, however doing so will cause you to mishap.

You're reading out of context

DeathReaper wrote:Right, and the rules allow for circles with as many models that will fit. so if that is a 4 model circle then you move to the next circle and get as many models as will fit in the next circle.

A four model circle is always less than what will fit (assuming there are more than 5 total models to place). If terrains blocks you from making a complete circle, you mishap. Very simple.

Nowhere does it say that if you can not fit more into the first circle you mishap.

you fill the circles with as many models as will fit, and move to the next circle.

alright so if your circle will fit 6 models and you only place 4 because of Impassable Terrain ... you mishap.

..and the reason they wont fit is because of impassable terrain, which causes you to mishap.

You're avoiding mishap by misreading a rule. It does not give you permission to avoid the mishap.

jdjamesdean@mail.com wrote:alright so if your circle will fit 6 models and you only place 4 because of Impassable Terrain ... you mishap.

No, because as many models as will fit is 4 models, so you move to the next circle.

DeathReaper wrote:What I am describing IS a circle with as many models as will fit.

No it's not. You're describing a circle with as many models as can be placed. You can fit more models into that circle, you just can't legally place them. Which is what triggers a mishap.

I get it. A model has to be 100% on the table to be on the table but a circle doesn't have to be complete to be a circle. OK then.................

Boss GreenNutz wrote:I get it. A model has to be 100% on the table to be on the table but a circle doesn't have to be complete to be a circle. OK then.................

Because the rules allow for as many models as will fit.

I am describing a circle with as many models as will fit, according to the rules this is allowed. be it 3 or 5 models, then you move on to the next circle.

insaniak wrote:You can fit more models into that circle, you just can't legally place them. Which is what triggers a mishap.

You can not fit more, because there is impassible terrain there.

so no mishap.

Either way, it will not come up much, and the rule is written poorly so I will leave it at that.

DeathReaper wrote:

Boss GreenNutz wrote:I get it. A model has to be 100% on the table to be on the table but a circle doesn't have to be complete to be a circle. OK then.................

Because the rules allow for as many models as will fit.

I am describing a circle with as many models as will fit, according to the rules this is allowed. be it 3 or 5 models, then you move on to the next circle.

insaniak wrote:You can fit more models into that circle, you just can't legally place them. Which is what triggers a mishap.

You can not fit more, because there is impassible terrain there.

so no mishap.

Either way, it will not come up much, and the rule is written poorly so I will leave it at that.

Actually the rules are written fine, you're misinterpreting them. As many models as will fit, is quite diferent than as many models that will legally fit.
when you place your 4/6 you are inherently ignoring the DS rules

DeathReaper wrote:You can not fit more, because there is impassible terrain there.

so no mishap.

By this argument, a mishap is never going to occur unless the original model scatters onto an obstacle.

If you have more than a base-sized gap between models in the circle, you can fit more models in the circle. The fact that impassable terrain is preventing you from placing them is exactly what triggers the mishap... where the model needs to go is somewhere that it can't be placed.

insaniak wrote:By this argument, a mishap is never going to occur unless the original model scatters onto an obstacle.

If you have more than a base-sized gap between models in the circle, you can fit more models in the circle. The fact that impassable terrain is preventing you from placing them is exactly what triggers the mishap... where the model needs to go is somewhere that it can't be placed.

I read it the other way as it says as many as will fit.

If the "as many as will fit" clause was not there I could see it working as you have described.

jdjamesdean@mail.com wrote:Actually the rules are written fine, you're misinterpreting them.

In your opinion.

So what in your interpretation of the rules would cause a mishap to occur? From what I see it would only happen if the center model scattered onto impassible terrain, an enemy unit or off the table.

DeathReaper wrote:If the "as many as will fit" clause was not there I could see it working as you have described.

Sorry, that makes no sense. You're saying that if it didn't require you to place as many as can fit, then you would have to place as many as can fit... but because it does say that you have to place as many as can fit, you don't actually have to?

DeathReaper wrote:What I am describing IS a circle with as many models as will fit.

The models that will fit are put in a circle around the first, then you move on to the second circle with as many models as will fit.

No, what you're describing is an arc, which is a portion of a circle.

To clarify, for something to be "a circle with as many models as will fit," it must first be a circle. If the models only complete a portion of the circle, then you have an arc, not a circle, and have failed to satisfy the first part of the requirement.

Boss GreenNutz wrote:So what in your interpretation of the rules would cause a mishap to occur? From what I see it would only happen if the center model scattered onto impassible terrain, an enemy unit or off the table.

That's the way I read that part of the rules as well, so DR isn't alone in his way of thinking. It didn't even occur to me that it might not be the right way of doing it until this thread - now I'm not sure.

I guess for Drop Pods/Mycetic Spores, the deployed troops aren't DSing, they're disembarking but count as DSing?

Yes, which means you abide by both rules - however the general movement rules (cant move into impassable terrain) prevents you from making them mishap

Boss GreenNutz wrote:So what in your interpretation of the rules would cause a mishap to occur? From what I see it would only happen if the center model scattered onto impassible terrain, an enemy unit or off the table.

That or if you were surrounded by enemy models and or impassible terrain, and could not place all the models in the DSing unit due to ther being no space at all.

insaniak wrote:

DeathReaper wrote:If the "as many as will fit" clause was not there I could see it working as you have described.

Sorry, that makes no sense. You're saying that if it didn't require you to place as many as can fit, then you would have to place as many as can fit... but because it does say that you have to place as many as can fit, you don't actually have to?

I am saying that the rules say to place as many as will fit. If there is impassible terrain in the way then clearly the models can not fit, and you are allowed to make another circle, as per the rules.

DeathReaper wrote: If there is impassible terrain in the way then clearly the models can not fit, ...

Except they can. If the circle is not complete, there is room to fit more models. If there is impassable terrain in the way, that simply means that the models can not be placed, not that they can't fit in the circle.

You don't have a complete circle, because the terrain is preventing you from completing it. Hence, a mishap.

So what you are saying is, there is no way to Deep Strike a unit of 3 or 4 models, since you will not have a complete circle?

No, I'm saying you have to complete a circle before you can move onto the next. Having insufficient models to complete a circle does not prevent you from placing models.

If a model can not be legally placed in the appropriate circle, the unit mishaps.

insaniak wrote:No, I'm saying you have to complete a circle before you can move onto the next. Having insufficient models to complete a circle does not prevent you from placing models.

If a model can not be legally placed in the appropriate circle, the unit mishaps.

We clearly read that differently, and that is okay.

The rules are a bit ambiguous.

Moving on now. Thank you all for the discussion.

-DR

DeathReaper wrote:

insaniak wrote:No, I'm saying you have to complete a circle before you can move onto the next. Having insufficient models to complete a circle does not prevent you from placing models.

If a model can not be legally placed in the appropriate circle, the unit mishaps.

We clearly read that differently, and that is okay.

The rules are a bit ambiguous.

Moving on now. Thank you all for the discussion.

-DR

If you really think every single person in this thread disagreeing with you are seeing something magical in the rules that you're not, I suggest you try making a poll thread where you post the rules and describe the situation and ask what people think the rules say in this case (mishap or no mishap). I think you will find an overwhelming majority of people disagree with you to the point where your interpretation borders on ridiculousness.

Anyone else find it a touch ironic that DeathReaper's signature contains the definition of the area of a circle?

On a constructive note, I'm with everyone else on the matter.

yakface wrote:If you really think every single person in this thread disagreeing with you are seeing something magical in the rules that you're not, I suggest you try making a poll thread where you post the rules and describe the situation and ask what people think the rules say in this case (mishap or no mishap). I think you will find an overwhelming majority of people disagree with you to the point where your interpretation borders on ridiculousness.

While I respect you yakface, I have to disagree with this post. As I said earlier, I read the rules the same way as DR and I'm still not convinced it's an incorrect reading. I'm sure I wouldn't be the only one.

rigeld2 wrote:
While I respect you yakface, I have to disagree with this post. As I said earlier, I read the rules the same way as DR and I'm still not convinced it's an incorrect reading. I'm sure I wouldn't be the only one.

I certainly wasn't trying to imply that he would be the only person sharing that opinion. Experience with the INAT has taught me that no matter how outlandish the interpretation of the rules there are always at least some people who read it that way.

There is a big difference between an issue that is a 60/40 split and one that it is 90/10, and I would be very, very surprised to find that this issue is closer to the 60/40 situation then it is the 90/10.

But by all means, feel free to try to prove me wrong by creating a poll thread!

I would guess more of a 98/2 result.

It's probably in the 20-25% range honestly

Agreed with Nos, Insaniak, Yak and almost everyone else in this thread.

DeathReaper has a spiteful (and misguided) quote in his signature about what the area of a circle is, perhaps the rest of the definition of a circle should be included?

editing to add:
Not being able to complete a circle because of something that is defined as causing a mishap is definitely a strange thing to justify NOT causing a mishap.

kirsanth wrote:DeathReaper has a spiteful (and misguided) quote in his signature about what the area of a circle is, perhaps the rest of the definition of a circle should be included?

First off, it is not a quote.

Second, why do you think its "spiteful (and misguided)"?

rigeld2 wrote:

yakface wrote:If you really think every single person in this thread disagreeing with you are seeing something magical in the rules that you're not, I suggest you try making a poll thread where you post the rules and describe the situation and ask what people think the rules say in this case (mishap or no mishap). I think you will find an overwhelming majority of people disagree with you to the point where your interpretation borders on ridiculousness.

While I respect you yakface, I have to disagree with this post. As I said earlier, I read the rules the same way as DR and I'm still not convinced it's an incorrect reading. I'm sure I wouldn't be the only one.

OK, here's an excellent example of what you are describing. I DS into a tight canyon (giggity). I hit, but the canyon is 1 model wide:

| 5 |
| 3 |
| 1 |
| 2 |
| 4 |

Since I can draw circles around 1, and just can't put people in base to base contact on the left or the right, I'm OK to DS in this straight line? The rule specifically makes you tighten into circles (honestly, a spiral of sorts), but I've flattened out my deployment completely using terrain.

Just my two cents, but no way is this RAW or RAI.

Pedrowan wrote:Since I can draw circles around 1, and just can't put people in base to base contact on the left or the right, I'm OK to DS in this straight line? The rule specifically makes you tighten into circles (honestly, a spiral of sorts), but I've flattened out my deployment completely using terrain.

Just my two cents, but no way is this RAW or RAI.

That's how I read it, partially because reading it any other way means that large units of Gargoyles (can you tell I started 40k with Tyranids?) would be screwed when trying to DS.

rigeld2 wrote:

Pedrowan wrote:Since I can draw circles around 1, and just can't put people in base to base contact on the left or the right, I'm OK to DS in this straight line? The rule specifically makes you tighten into circles (honestly, a spiral of sorts), but I've flattened out my deployment completely using terrain.

Just my two cents, but no way is this RAW or RAI.

That's how I read it, partially because reading it any other way means that large units of Gargoyles (can you tell I started 40k with Tyranids?) would be screwed when trying to DS.

So?

There are lots of rules that exist in the game that make certain actions by certain units either a bad choice or difficult to pull off. In the case of a large unit of gargoyles, this rule merely means you have to be more careful and select a nice, wide-open area to target for your deepstrike. The unit isn't "screwed," it's options as far as where to choose to deepstrike are merely more limited.

DeathReaper wrote:First off, it is not a quote.

Second, why do you think its "spiteful (and misguided)"?

So you would prefer I wrote

"DeathReaper has
"P.S. please learn what area means.
Hint: for a circle it is: Pi * R²"
in his signature?"

Really? Or was that a joke I missed?

You have it there (unless the timing is just insane) because of a debate that is basically the same as this one, you pointing out what a circle is and missing the actual reason it is used.

Oddly, it is exceptional in this case because your position has basically reversed.

Editing to add:
In that case my position was ruled against, and I acknowledge it entirely; however you are basically claiming that it somehow works differently in this one case.

Saldiven wrote:There are lots of rules that exist in the game that make certain actions by certain units either a bad choice or difficult to pull off. In the case of a large unit of gargoyles, this rule merely means you have to be more careful and select a nice, wide-open area to target for your deepstrike. The unit isn't "screwed," it's options as far as where to choose to deepstrike are merely more limited.

I'm not saying that my reading was correct. I'm saying that I read "Jump Infantry can deep strike" and thought "Oh cool, gargoyles are JI - lemme see what that means" and went to read DS.
Dropping 30 gargs into a crowded backfield doesn't make much sense if it's that easy to mishap. It's like taking Toxin Sacs on a Carnifex - yes, it's possible, but some people might laugh at you and say it's a bad idea.

rigeld2 wrote:

Saldiven wrote:There are lots of rules that exist in the game that make certain actions by certain units either a bad choice or difficult to pull off. In the case of a large unit of gargoyles, this rule merely means you have to be more careful and select a nice, wide-open area to target for your deepstrike. The unit isn't "screwed," it's options as far as where to choose to deepstrike are merely more limited.

I'm not saying that my reading was correct. I'm saying that I read "Jump Infantry can deep strike" and thought "Oh cool, gargoyles are JI - lemme see what that means" and went to read DS.
Dropping 30 gargs into a crowded backfield doesn't make much sense if it's that easy to mishap. It's like taking Toxin Sacs on a Carnifex - yes, it's possible, but some people might laugh at you and say it's a bad idea.

Darn why'd they make it so easy to mishap than? Possibly they gave them wings so they could move faster than standard infantry, or take the option to mishap when you try and DS a ton of them. Just a hidden LOL from C:Nid

rigeld2 wrote:Dropping 30 gargs into a crowded backfield doesn't make much sense if it's that easy to mishap. It's like taking Toxin Sacs on a Carnifex - yes, it's possible, but some people might laugh at you and say it's a bad idea.

That is the same reason I don't try to DS a full mob of Stormboyz into someones backfield. To me it doesn't make sense that a unit with 3 attacks base should be able to DS right into someone with little to no risk of a mishap. Looking at it from another way if you can get around a mishap if only the center model is counted then is there really a need for teleport homers and other fancy pieces of wargear designed to allow you to place the unit without scattering?

Boss GreenNutz wrote:Looking at it from another way if you can get around a mishap if only the center model is counted then is there really a need for teleport homers and other fancy pieces of wargear designed to allow you to place the unit without scattering?

Yes, because scattering onto another unit, off the table, onto impassible terrain still mishaps...

You mishap if the model you put on the table scatters onto impassible terrain, enemy units, friendly units, or off the table. This is when you mishap. If you roll your scatter and that model on the table does not mishap, then the whole unit does not mishap. All this circle nonsense. For what it's worth I think Death Reaper's original point, that you put as many models in the circle as possible then move on, is correct.

Incorrect gpfunk, for all the actual rules put into the thread that contradict DRs reading

Sorry but please reference me a page number in the BRB that states an arc is defined the same as a circle. What is nonsense is attempting to use a rule that does not exist.

O <--------This is a cirlce (actually an "oh" but whatever)

) or ( would be an arc which is what you are saying you can use if there are enemy models/impassible terrain in the way. Attempting that is not abiding by the rules for forming a complete circle around the center model before starting another one.

gpfunk wrote:You mishap if the model you put on the table scatters onto impassible terrain, enemy units, friendly units, or off the table. This is when you mishap. If you roll your scatter and that model on the table does not mishap, then the whole unit does not mishap. All this circle nonsense. For what it's worth I think Death Reaper's original point, that you put as many models in the circle as possible then move on, is correct.

You're referring to the "circle nonsense" that appears in the rules for placing models via deepstrike?

DR's descrptions do not involve circles, they involve arcs. The two are not the same.

(Edited for typo.)

Jumping in here. In the rules it says that you must place the models in a circle around the center model. right got that. Show me a page number that says you must form a complete circle around the center model before you may begin on the second circle.

cassiaus wrote: Show me a page number that says you must form a complete circle around the center model before you may begin on the second circle.

Er... it's right there in the same section that tells you to form a circle. So page 95.

This argument is very... cyclical

Adding my 2 penneth - I have always played it by DR's interpretation, and it never even crossed my mind this was wrong.

cassiaus wrote:Jumping in here. In the rules it says that you must place the models in a circle around the center model. right got that. Show me a page number that says you must form a complete circle around the center model before you may begin on the second circle.

Um...a circle is, by definition, complete. A circle is defined as a closed figure. If your "circle" isn't complete, it's not a circle.

An incomplete portion of a circle is defined as an arc.

Page 95 instructs you to make circles, not arcs.

Sorry, I got a "C" in Geometry. I do not recognize this "Arc".

Anyway. I think, by RAW, the majority opinion is right.

That being said, We've played by DR's version the whole time, and I never considered being wrong either. After reading all this, I think we'll still play by DR's version just because...I dunno. I like it more. And it's what we do anyway.

BTW everyone - The game is way more enjoyable when you don't take it so seriously. I know "You make Da Call" is for RAW discussions only but the insults are kind of over the line. Let's calm down a bit.

Better yet show me a page number that says the circle doesn't have to be complete before you start on the second one.

TheRedArmy wrote:Sorry, I got a "C" in Geometry. I do not recognize this "Arc".

Anyway. I think, by RAW, the majority opinion is right.

That being said, We've played by DR's version the whole time, and I never considered being wrong either. After reading all this, I think we'll still play by DR's version just because...I dunno. I like it more. And it's what we do anyway.

BTW everyone - The game is way more enjoyable when you don't take it so seriously. I know "You make Da Call" is for RAW discussions only but the insults are kind of over the line. Let's calm down a bit.

Its not like the majority opinion is 'taking the rules seriously' and the interpretation you're backing is 'taking the rules less seriously'. You're talking about fundamentally changing the potency of Deep Striking units and their ability to land in congested situations.

The fact, is the vast, vast majority of people read the rules that don't allow you to deploy further circles if you can't complete the fist one. So to play the other way means that you're giving Deep Striking units a huge boot in reliability, something that is not what the designers intended, nor wrote, according to most people who read the same rules you are.


So let's look at the rules again. First you have the rules for how to deploy the unit from deep strike (emphasis mine):

"Once [the first mode's position is determined], the unit's remaining models are arranged around the first one. Models must be placed in bast contact with the original model in a circle around it. When the first circle is complete, a further circle should be placed with each model touching the circle inside it. Each circle should include as many models as will fit."


These rules explain how the unit must be deployed. Absolutely no mention is made about impassable terrain, enemy units, etc. There is literally no provision given here to NOT place models in the circles as specifically defined in that rule. Regardless of whether you're putting models in impassable terrain, on friendly/enemy models, etc, per the rules given here you HAVE to place the models specifically as described.

Again, remember that the rules are permissive...you cannot do something that the rules don't say that you are allowed to do, and the rules very clearly state that you don't start a further circle until the first circle is complete.


Now if we read on further into the rules we get into the part about mishaps (emphasis mine):

"If any of the models in a deep striking unit cannot be deployed because they would land off the table, in impassable terrain, on top of a friendly model, or on top of or within 1" of an enemy model, something has gone wrong."


This is very important. As I have pointed out previously, there are no rules outside of what I just posted saying that Deep Striking models aren't allowed to deploy within 1" of enemy models, on friendly models, in impassable terrain, etc. It is *ONLY* the passage I just posted that covers such situations and it says absolutely nothing about being able to change the deployment pattern of Deep Striking because of the presence of enemy models, impassable terrain, etc.

The only thing it says is that if any Deep Striking model in the uint WOULD not be able to be deployed for the listed reasons then the unit will mishap.

Again, this rule is in regards to how the unit *WOULD* deploy. So you use the rules for Deep Strike deployment to determine how the unit would deploy and then if any of the models in the unit WOULD end up being in one of those illegal positions, then the unit suffers a mishap.

There is absolutely no rules stating that you are able to change the Deep Strike formation of concentric circles because of the presence of impassable terrain, enemy/friendly models, the edge of the table, etc.


So the rules are quite clear (at least to a vast majority) and yes, they make Deep Striking a 30 man squad of Gargoyles into a congested position risky and that is their whole point! They are intended to create a very real risk/reward scenario when Deep Striking units into tight spots and the bigger the unit and the tighter the spot the more risky the move.

By ignoring the rules and playing it the way you want, you dramatically alter this risk/reward balance and make Deep Striking much more reliable (and therefore powerful) then it is supposed to be.

It sayson the same page "...as many as will fit..." if something blocks a portion of the circle, that's as many as will fit by the rules. That gives permission to start the next circle. Laster it say if any model cannot be placed due to impassible terrain, etc the unit mishaps. Not if any model cannot complete the circle.

I read it like DR, however I can see where the dispute lies.

It says "as many as will fit" and it also says "When the first circle is complete, a further circle should be placed". Under your reading, Yonush, these rules are in conflict and create a situation where you do not know which one takes precedence.

One of the basic principles of rules interpretation is, if two rules seem to be in conflict, to see if there is a way they can be read/interpreted which does NOT require them to be in conflict. In this case, if you take the passage "as many as will fit" to be referring to bigger and smaller base sizes, then there is no conflict.

In addition, your interpretation requires you to ignore the passage where the DS rules tell us "If any of the models in a deep striking unit cannot be deployed because they would land off the table, in impassable terrain, on top of a friendly model..." because the way you are interpreting it, only the first model matters.

But the models CAN be deployed. Where does it say that if a circle cannot be completed the unit mishaps. It doesn't. You're. Interprting the rules to make that claim.

Yonush wrote:But the models CAN be deployed. Where does it say that if a circle cannot be completed the unit mishaps. It doesn't. You're. Interprting the rules to make that claim.

It doesn't have to. It says to place them in a circle. As many models as can fit in a circle, in a circle.
You are the one stating they don't actually have to be placed in a circle.

Yonush, the way you play it, what does "If any of the models in a deep striking unit cannot be deployed because they would land off the table, in impassable terrain, on top of a friendly model..." mean during the game?

Wow, I can't believe this has gone on as long as it has.

Those who fall in DR's camp keep focusing on the "as many models as possible" line, but seem to ignore the line that states the circle must be complete and that models in subsequent circles must be placed base to base with models from previous circles.

If a player places models in a new "circle" before bringing a prior circle to completion, they are violating the requirement that the circle must be complete. The requirement for the circle to be complete comes before the addition that as many models as possible must be included.

Both aspects are rules, and neither one overrides the others. You must both have a complete circle and use as many models as possible to do so.

The only requirement for a complete circle is the first one.

rigeld2 wrote:The only requirement for a complete circle is the first one.

umm No its not, "when the first circle is complete, a further circle should be placed with each model touching the circle inside it" pg 95 BGB

"Each circle should include as many models as will fit" 95 BGB

If your not fitting as many as you should into the circle you're simply not following DS rules

so the rules say that the first circle must be complete, and then it says that models should touch the circle inside, and include as many models as will fit. How is that not what I said?

Where is the rule that the 2nd - Nth circle must be complete? The rules do not say that every model in the first circle must be touched by a model in the second circle (which would require a complete second circle) or that the second circle must be complete.

Because if you deepstrike 20 models and should fit as many into the circle as will fit. You will flesh out at least 2-3 circles complete before a partial will be made.

i agree with the above post you are reading it out of context if what you say is the case you could place a line of models and not mishap because you can only fit 1 in a circle

it is just a really stupid way to read the rules and i am not sure how you see it the way you do

Where is the requirement that the 2nd-Nth circles must be complete?

Is there really that hard of a time understanding this line " should include as many models as will fit"

If you can fit 8 in your second circle, but an enemy model is in the way you will mishap.

No, if there's an enemy model in the second circle, I can't fit 8 models.

so you're saying if due to Enemy models or impassable terrain, etc you can consider one model in a circle, a circle?

Should and Can't are two things entirely

So what happens if you can't complete a circle for another reason such as deep striking onto a floor of a ruin/ building?

curtis wrote:So what happens if you can't complete a circle for another reason such as deep striking onto a floor of a ruin/ building?

Note, you can not deep strike into buildings.

jdjamesdean@mail.com wrote:Should and Can't are two things entirely

Correct. The rule says "should", not "must". And there is no reference to the second or any circles after the first having to be complete.

rigeld2 wrote:Where is the requirement that the 2nd-Nth circles must be complete?

A circle, by definition, is complete. If it is not complete, it is not a circle. Circles are closed figures; if your grouping of models does not create a closed figure, then it cannot be a circle.

It really is as simple as that.

Edit: I'm fighting really hard to avoid violating forum rules and posting the definition of a circle, but it's becoming apparent that many posters here have forgotten their elementary school classes on learning shapes.

So the reference to "a complete circle" is redundant?

You can describe a circle using very few points.

rigeld2 wrote:So the reference to "a complete circle" is redundant?

You can describe a circle using very few points.

Yes, a "complete circle" is redundant.

If you describe a circle from any "viewpoint" that leaves said "circle" as an open figure, it is not a circle.

There really isn't any debate on what a circle is. "Circle" as a geometric figure has a specific meaning that doesn't have leeway for interpretation.

If you only have a few points that are being used to "define" the circle using geometry, there is no guarantee that the figure will, in fact, be a circle. It could be a parabola, for example, or any other function that plots out a curved line on a plane. If you do not "complete" the circle, there is no guarantee that the models placed are actually creating a circle.

Unless you're contending that the deepstriking models are instead forming a dance circle or a knitting circle....

o='s circle
. =/= circle
) =/= circle

so if you deepstrike 10+ IC

So the IC is in the middle, than 6 will fit around him IIRC, than the other 4 must be on the outside in any fashion which is fine as you only had 4 to fit

The issue comes when you try to deepstrike larger based models or very large squads.

However if you have the models you need to fill in each circle.

jdjamesdean@mail.com wrote:so if you deepstrike 10+ IC

So the IC is in the middle, than 6 will fit around him IIRC, than the other 4 must be on the outside in any fashion which is fine as you only had 4 to fit.

Saldiven wrote:

Saldiven wrote:If you describe a circle from any "viewpoint" that leaves said "circle" as an open figure, it is not a circle.

A circle, by definition, is complete. If it is not complete, it is not a circle. Circles are closed figures; if your grouping of models does not create a closed figure, then it cannot be a circle.

You can never have a circle with the infantry models that are on the 25mm bases.

you have your center model, and then you can only fit 5 models around it, there is almost room for a 6th, but not quite.

Point being you will never have a complete circle.

That is as many as can fit, and thus describes the complete circle.

Your reading requires one rule to have no meaning.

nosferatu1001 wrote:That is as many as can fit, and thus describes the complete circle.

Your reading requires one rule to have no meaning.

The underlined is EXACTLY what I was saying in my earlier posts.

DeathReaper wrote:You can never have a circle with the infantry models that are on the 25mm bases.

you have your center model, and then you can only fit 5 models around it, there is almost room for a 6th, but not quite.

Point being you will never have a complete circle.

Okay, using that as an example, a complete circle is 5 miniatures as 6 will not fit around the IC; this will be less for miniatures on 40mm bases.

so 5 25mm based miniatures = second circle for squads that consist of 6+ models (around the first miniature in the center)

2-4 25mm based miniatures = circle as far as the rules are concerned

So if you have a unit of 6+ miniatures, first one is where you want the squad to be, remaining 5 must circle the first as best as possible.

However! If there is impassable terrain, board edge or enemy unit located in such a way that even one of the five cannot be placed in base to base with the first then you have mishapped as you have no been able to place "as many as possible" which as you yourself have mentioned is five.

DeathReaper wrote:

nosferatu1001 wrote:That is as many as can fit, and thus describes the complete circle.

Your reading requires one rule to have no meaning.

The underlined is EXACTLY what I was saying in my earlier posts.

No, in your earlier posts you are arguing the "as many as will fit" clause is there to allow you to avoid DS mishaps. What he is saying outlines how the clause is supposed to be read and used in relation to deploying a DS unit.

I really don't see how this is being argued. A circle is not an arc, the only way you can have an arc and not a circle is if your model cannot fit due to models from the same unit keeping it from fitting. Is that spelled out explicitly no, but as Yakface pointed out already that is how it works. The "as many models as can fit" is not there to keep you from mishaping it is there to tell you how to deploy a DS unit. It is a willful misreading of the rules to state otherwise.

You spin me right round baby right round like a record baby...

Guys, its in the FAQ. Strait on. They give an example. Using terminators. Dark Reaper is correct, as long as the first model is placeable

I need a quote before I buy that one.

Config2 wrote:Guys, its in the FAQ. Strait on. They give an example. Using terminators. Dark Reaper is correct, as long as the first model is placeable

Please quote which FAQ and page for reference, or stop blowing smoke.

Config2 wrote:Guys, its in the FAQ. Strait on. They give an example. Using terminators. Dark Reaper is correct, as long as the first model is placeable

What are you referring to? There is no such FAQ in the rulebook FAQ nor in the SM FAQ, so I'm not sure where you got this idea from.

In fact, let's take a look at one Deep Strike ruling actually in the rulebook FAQ:

Q: If a unit arriving by Deep Strike cannot be placed fully on the table, must it roll on the Deep Strike Mishap Table?
A: Yes.


With the incorrect interpretation you're pushing it is nearly impossible for this scenario to occur (part of a Deep Striking unit ending up off the table).

Moreover, how do you continue to ignore this portion of the Deep Strike rules (p95):

"If any of the models in a deep striking unit cannot be deployed because they would land off the table..."

rigeld2 wrote:No, if there's an enemy model in the second circle, I can't fit 8 models.

As I demonstrated in my previous post, there are NO RULES which allow you to change the deployment of a Deep Striking unit based on the presence of enemy models, impassable terrain, edge of the table, etc. The ONLY such rules are in the Deep Strike mishap section and they say that if that happens (the models would be deployed in those situations) then the unit mishaps.

So as soon as you can find the rule that allows you to change the deployment method described because of the presence of enemy models, edge of the table, etc, then you would be right. However those rules don't exist and therefore you have to deploy your Deep Striking unit precisely as described in the Deep Strike rules.

OverwatchCNC wrote:... A circle is not an arc...

Neither is a C

Which is what you currently have with having 5 models around 1 model.

Yakface has it dead on.

Here we go:

http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/399849.page


Its a poll to see just what kind of split plays this issue one way or the other.

DeathReaper wrote:

OverwatchCNC wrote:... A circle is not an arc...

Neither is a C

Which is what you currently have with having 5 models around 1 model.

Correct, but those five models will have properly fulfilled the rules for deepstrike deployment; whereas 10 models deployed the way you suggest would be breaking the rules since there is no permission given in the rules for deepstrike deployment to ignore models, board edge, or impassable terrain.

40k=permissive rule set. Permission is not expressly given to ignore intervening models, the board edge, or impassable terrain; therefore your attempt at rules lawyering better deep strike rules has met with failure. Show me the rule allowing you to ignore enemy models, impassable terrain, and the board edge while deploying a deepstriking unit and I will admit you are correct, but no such permission is given.

Except for the clause that each circle must contain as many models as will fit. That is your allowance, If you read my earlier posts you would have known that.

DeathReaper wrote:Except for the clause that each circle must contain as many models as will fit. That is your allowance, If you read my earlier posts you would have known that.

I read the earlier posts. You conveniently ignore "when the first circle is complete". Unless you don't have sufficient models to complete the circle the circle must be completed before moving on to the next circle. RAW.

No, it is complete when you "include as many models as will fit."

and with regular 25mm bases you will never have a complete circle, it will always be a C and not a complete circle.

But as I said before:

We clearly read that differently, and that is okay.

The rules are a bit ambiguous.

Moving on now. Thank you all for the discussion.

-DR

DeathReaper wrote:No, it is complete when you "include as many models as will fit."

No...that is not actually true.

It is only complete when it is complete, yet you are given an allowance to stop adding models that do not fit. Those are not the same thing.
Saying they are the same allowance is part of your error.

Eding to add:
There are specific instance of not allowing models to be placed that cause a mishap.
Not being able to fit models because of those is cause for mishap, not for ignoring DS rules.

DeathReaper wrote:We clearly read that differently, and that is okay.

Clearly. However, you still haven't answered the question that has been asked several times now as to what the rules mean when they state that the unit mishaps if any models would wind up on impassable terrain, other models, etc when your interpretation of the rules means that this will never actually happen.

When your interpretation goes against the majority concensus and renders a portion of the rules completely meaningless, surely it's time to stop and reassess whether maybe, just maybe, you're reading it wrong?

It does not render a portion of the rules completely meaningless.

"what the rules mean when they state that the unit mishaps if any models would wind up on impassable terrain, other models, etc"

they mean if there is nowhere to place all the models in the unit.

If they happen to scatter into a place where they are completely surrounded by friendly or enemy models and all of the models can not be placed, then you mishap.

That's how It reads, with the inclusion of "As many as will fit"

If you can only fit 3 models around the first model, then 3 models is as many as will fit. seems pretty simple to me.

The fact remains that the circle will either:

"Be as complete as possible with as many as will fit"

Or

"Never be complete because you can not have a complete circle, since there is only room for 5 models and when you place 5 models around 1 model it is not a complete circle."

DeathReaper wrote:
"Never be complete because you can not have a complete circle, since there is only room for 5 models and when you place 5 models around 1 model it is not a complete circle."

I don't know why you continue to say that you can only place five models around the first model. I'm 99% sure that the six models I placed around the center model is not some form of wizardry. Go ahead and try it out. Take one model, then put six models around it. On 25mm bases.

If you can place the six models, you have a complete circle with no gaps.

Blacksails wrote:

DeathReaper wrote:
"Never be complete because you can not have a complete circle, since there is only room for 5 models and when you place 5 models around 1 model it is not a complete circle."

I don't know why you continue to say that you can only place five models around the first model. I'm 99% sure that the six models I placed around the center model is not some form of wizardry. Go ahead and try it out. Take one model, then put six models around it. On 25mm bases.

If you can place the six models, you have a complete circle with no gaps.

I have, you can not get the 6th model to fit in the space, notice how the other bases move when you try to jam it in there.

The space is not quite big enough.

DeathReaper wrote:

Blacksails wrote:

DeathReaper wrote:
"Never be complete because you can not have a complete circle, since there is only room for 5 models and when you place 5 models around 1 model it is not a complete circle."

I don't know why you continue to say that you can only place five models around the first model. I'm 99% sure that the six models I placed around the center model is not some form of wizardry. Go ahead and try it out. Take one model, then put six models around it. On 25mm bases.

If you can place the six models, you have a complete circle with no gaps.

I have, you can not get the 6th model to fit in the space, notice how the other bases move when you try to jam it in there.

The space is not quite big enough.

I'm not sure if we're talking about the same bases, but I can quite easily get six around another model, all touching with no gaps. Perfect fit. Yakface has a good picture of what it looks like in his poll thread about this topic. You should be able to fit six around a model in a perfect circle.

we are talking about the 25mm bases, the ones for infantry. (Regular infantry, not terminators or beasts or anything like that, the base you would find a Space Marine standing on.)

Vassal is not a good representation, since its a computer drawing and does not precisely represent the size of the bases in real life.

Try this: Take one base and use some sticky tack to hold it into place on a smooth flat surface.

Arrange 5 bases around the first base, again holding them down with sticky tack so they do not move.

Notice how, when you try to slide the 6th base in, it does not actually touch the original model without moving the other bases.

there is a gap between the 6th model and the original model, so it can not be placed there as it "Will not fit"

Now try it without moving any of the 5 surrounding models.

DeathReaper wrote:Now try it without moving any of the 5 surrounding models.

Try what? I showed to you I could make a circle around the center model with six models as opposed to your claim of five. Any further models needed to be placed would be done in another circle around that. I don't see that there is anything left to prove.

Try fitting 6 around the 1st without moving any of the models you have already placed.

Every time I try to fit 6, I can not.

There is a small gap between the 6th base that tries to fit in the circle, and the 1st model placed.

If i force the last model in there I can get it to touch, but I can not get it to fit without moving the models I have already placed.

DeathReaper wrote:Try fitting 6 around the 1st without moving any of the models you have already placed.

Every time I try to fit 6, I can not.

There is a small gap between the 6th base that tries to fit in the circle, and the 1st model placed.

If i force the last model in there I can get it to touch, but I can not get it to fit without moving the models I have already placed.

Then how do you explain how I demonstrated my ability to place six models around the first? Surely, there must be a way to do it, otherwise that photo would not exist. Besides, its irrelevant how the models are placed or in what order so long as the first circle is complete and all the bases touch the center model. I have proven this to be possible.

"as many as will fit" in a circle around the model, not "as many will CURRENTLY fit" around the model.

Youre arguing the equivalent of Plaguebearers not being able to take FNP. How many bases will fit around in the first circle? 6. If youre only able to fit 5, because of terrain etc, then you have not put as many models as will fit, and you trigger the mishap.

one of those in the photo are not touching the center base.

It is just not physically possible. one of the bases is a little bit away from the center base. Move that to touch and one of the others is not touching, its a vicious cycle.

Unless you have bases that are shaved down or something (Not claiming that you do)

As many as will fit is 5, if you are in the open. This forms a C around the first model, and not a circle.

and as many as will fit, varies on where the original is, it is not always a static number.

Errr...I'm beyond certain that all of them are touching the center model. The photo may not be perfect, but it certainly shows they're all touching.

I cannot be the only person capable of performing this seemingly impossible task. If you're going to argue that one of the bases in the photo isn't touching the center model, then we must have different definitions of touching.

Anyways, I'm done here. I'm sure most people will find that placing six models around the center model to be quite possible.

DR - you're inserting extra words there. It is not "how many will CURRENTLY fit", but "how many will fit"

How many will fit is a static number, based on the base sizes

Blacksails, I will get a pic and show you exactly what I mean.

Pic Forthcoming.

DeathReaper wrote:Blacksails, I will get a pic and show you exactly what I mean.

Pic Forthcoming.

You do know that six circles of equal size will fit around a single circle of equal size correct?

That's pretty basic geometry (do some google searches on the subject and you'll see).

yakface wrote:

DeathReaper wrote:Blacksails, I will get a pic and show you exactly what I mean.

Pic Forthcoming.

You do know that six circles of equal size will fit around a single circle of equal size correct?

That's pretty basic geometry (do some google searches on the subject and you'll see).

Yup. That's a pretty fundamental rule in geometry. I think that's something that has been known for centuries.

It's possible that the reason you feel that other bases are moving is the fact that the surrounding circles will only contact each other circle at a single point, so there is very little leeway. Just as an exercise, I just did it wih seven pennies, and it only took a couple of seconds to get it right. If they were magnetized or something so they didn't shift around so easily, it would be a simpler exercise.

{Nevermind, I deleted a geometric proof that I rememberd incorrectly. I'll try to find the correct proof and post a link.}

If your bases aren't managing to do this, I would guess that they might be heat-warped.

Blacksails wrote:Errr...I'm beyond certain that all of them are touching the center model. The photo may not be perfect, but it certainly shows they're all touching.

I cannot be the only person capable of performing this seemingly impossible task. If you're going to argue that one of the bases in the photo isn't touching the center model, then we must have different definitions of touching.

Anyways, I'm done here. I'm sure most people will find that placing six models around the center model to be quite possible.

He isn't performing any sort of magic trick here. It is not only possible to do this but it occurs on a regular basis with the people who play the rule the correct way.

You also keep saying you can't get it to fit without moving one of the adjacent models which is immaterial to the argument. As long as the center model doesn't move and you complete the circle you may place the models in any order and with any jockeying for position you wish.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

yakface wrote:

DeathReaper wrote:Blacksails, I will get a pic and show you exactly what I mean.

Pic Forthcoming.

You do know that six circles of equal size will fit around a single circle of equal size correct?

That's pretty basic geometry (do some google searches on the subject and you'll see).

Edit: QFT

Do the math on this one, each base has approximately 26 mm of space allotted to it on a circumscribed circle. Now measure the bottom of a 40k base, there is plenty of room.

Maybe you need to keep adjusting the models because your initial placement is bad.

yakface wrote:You do know that six circles of equal size will fit around a single circle of equal size correct?

That's pretty basic geometry (do some google searches on the subject and you'll see).

Then my bases must be messed up somehow, because I can not quite fit the 6th one around the initial model when I try it.

OverwatchCNC wrote:You also keep saying you can't get it to fit without moving one of the adjacent models which is immaterial to the argument.

No its not, because every time I try to get that 6th one to touch, it moves a different base out of contact.

Your bases must not be circular

For one explanation of why you must have odd shaped bases, see http://math.stackexchange.com/questions/10648/why-is-a-circle-in-a-plane-surrounded-by-6-other-circles

@Nos: That, or he doesn't have bases that are all the same size. Maybe some are from different production lots and have a small variance in size?

No disrespect meant by this, but isn't the "arc" interpretation more than a little cheesy? It gives quite a large advantage through a very vague interpretation of the rules, typically it seems to be the most sportsman like to take the least advantageous interpretation when there's confusion.

The concept of Deep Strike is that the group of models drop in, materialize from the Warp, teleport or enter by some other means. The initial model is placed as a placeholder for the center of the unit because rolling for scatter with one model is easier than a whole unit. Once the center's location has been finalized the rules attempt to describe how to spread models out evenly in all directions to determine if the unit as a whole has landed in a location which would cause a mishap.

The spirit of the rules is that the entire unit drops in a big blob along with the initial placeholder model then scatter together, but it's just not feasible to move that many models at once in formation. You don't know what terrain you'll actually be landing in and therefore have no control over your unit's formation.

By allowing players to place the remaining units in a way such that they avoid mishaps you're creating a paradox in which the unit has the ability to change their formation to avoid obstacles, but magically aren't able to do so when landing in open land, not to mention that if units can contol where they land then scatter as a whole makes no sense.

Based on this, not using complete circles seems like a strategy designed to ignore any common sense and play for advantage by avoiding mishaps. If both players are willing to agree to it then that's their business, but I'd be making quite a fuss if someone tried it on me, particularly in a competitive setting.