deep striking vehicles count as moving at cruiseing speed...
1) choose vehicle from reserve
2) declare tank shock attempt
3) aim at an enemy unit; straight down
4) declare distance; "maximum cruising speed" for deep striking vehicle, but is really infinite distance
Is step 5) where you think it is a no?
5) "... move the tank straight forward..."
Since I chose to reserve tank shock, why can I not choose the way my unit moves on the table? I choose deep strike, which follows all the movement rules for tank shock; straight forward toward target... (in this case do you think because a deep striking unit moves "down" is why it is a no?)
A tank does not have a front when it is deep striking?
Deep Strike Rules are movement rules in the movement phase.
deep striking vehicles count as moving at cruiseing speed...
1) choose vehicle from reserve
2) declare tank shock attempt
3) aim at an enemy unit; straight down
4) declare distance; "maximum cruising speed" for deep striking vehicle, but is really infinite distance
Is step 5) where you think it is a no?
5) "... move the tank straight forward..."
Since I chose to reserve tank shock, why can I not choose the way my unit moves on the table? I choose deep strike, which follows all the movement rules for tank shock; straight forward toward target... (in this case do you think because a deep striking unit moves "down" is why it is a no?)
A tank does not have a front when it is deep striking?
Deep Strike Rules are movement rules in the movement phase.
Deepstriking is not normal movement.
Otherwise you could Deepstrike every turn.
Deepstriking is a special form of movement normally used when coming from reserves.
I have to agree, that deepstriking is considered coming from the sky, and a tank shock is a high speed drive at a unit. If you wanted to deep strike to tank shock they have to create types of deep strike. IE i believe it is considered a monolith phases in from no where, as such the enemy units would be disrupting that teleport and ruin it. such as terminators phasing into orks. It just sounds bad. The result is a mishap, it is possible it dies. If they made you know types of deep strike like, SQUASH, SHIZSHAM! ALAKAZAM! where squash is you land on the enemy, make up stat for damage they take, SHIZSHAM they are hit by warp lightning, ALAKAZAM, they swap places or something. But you get my point OP; its a mishap. Further obvious explanation is models deep striking cant land in impassible terrain, allies, and foe are considered impassible terrain, if such a event happens it is a mishap!
Nah, as much as I love the monolith, this just can't happen it would be a mishap, since the deepstrike rules would override the tank shock rules and you would have to follow them to arrive on the table and if you mishap on an opponent then you never really arrived on the table because you, appear somewhere else, dont arrive or get lost in the warp etc.
Furthermore if you could(you cant) then would you say you could ram a vehicle in this fashion? Cause that would cause its own problems(both you and your target taking an automatic penetrating hit) due to speed.
Maybe it would be easier to understand if you explained that within 1" of an enemy model is a three dimensional circular bubble around the model, not just a flat 1" perimeter on the table.
So on top of a model is within that 1" bubble, for the sake of understand why this is against the current rules.
Even if it were legal, I would think it would immobilize or even destroy the deep striking monolith, so its kinda of a waste honestly. Suicide units aren't much fun.
Ok, recognizing that I may be accused of thread necromancy for this, but preferring to risk that than start an entirely new thread, or trolling, because my first post is to argue against the apparent consensus. Hopefully I can avoid that by adding something to the conversation. I apologize that this is rather long, but there are a number of issues which have been raised that I feel need addressed if I am to have any chance of changing the understanding of this rules situation.
Ignoring the responses that seem to be best summed up by “I don't like Monoliths and don't want them to have any power.” rather than actual rules or contextual arguments (ie; “NO, NO, NO. Just no,” “I've had my fair share of it,” and any post using the , or smilies.) I disagree with the current state of the conversation regarding Monolith Skimmer protection/Tank Shock during Deep Strike. Currently there appear to be two main arguments against either the Skimmer feature of the Monolith or the Tank Shock movement providing protection; a) that Deep Strike does not count as movement and b) that Deep Strike mishap triggers before any other consideration.
I'm attempting to address each of these with the concrete rules text, and would appreciate counter arguments that do the same. So far all of my conversations have amounted to “we've never done it that way” and, as I address here, vaguely cited rules omitting words which seem to have actual meaning changing effects.
Regarding (A); in my survey of the RAW and FAQ, there appears to be no explicit textual support in the 6th edition rules that Deep Strike is a non-movement 'placement' action. It is an action which occurs during the movement phase adjusting the position of unit (from reserves to the table). That it does so in a manner different than normal reserve entry seems immaterial without some text indicating a difference.
Moreover, the following two textual statements that directly counteract the idea it is some sort of non-movement action; “In the Movement phase during which they arrive, deep striking units may not move any further...” (BRB, p36- Deep Strike) The phrase “any further” clearly indicates that the writers considered the the unit to have moved. Then, in the next paragraph, you find a passage previously cited as; “In that turn's Shooting phase, these units can fire (or Run) as normal, and ... count as having moved in the previous Movement phase.” The argument forwarded being that they only “count as having moved for purposes of shooting.” and have not actually moved. This may be a reasonable interpretation, except that I have omitted the word “obviously.” Counting as having moved if the unit has not “actually moved” seems like it would preclude obviousness.
Having, I hope, established that Deep Strike is a form of movement this allows us to address two specific rules;
Skimmer protection;
The question is whether a skimmer which lands atop friendly or enemy units is considered to have “forced movement” placing them there. Having, again hopefully, addressed the question of whether it counts as movement, we turn to whether it is considered “forced.” Excluding the special case of intentionally targeting units, scatter deviation seems to be a classic case of required movement. Note that I am not arguing that the unit traverses the distance covered by the scatter, but instead that the unit has been adjusted from the endpoint desired by the player to another endpoint required by the rules in a manner outside player choice. I fail to see how, so long as the player chose a legal landing point, the adjustment of a unit's final location via scatter differs substantially in terms of “force” from any other rules required adjustment in location.
Tank Shock;
Regarding the idea that Deep Strike replaces normal movement, and thus does not allow normal movement to be replaced again, I have found no textual support. I welcome any text that would change that. However, adjusting the entry point alone seems to be a distinction without difference and, from discussions with my local gaming group, appears to be rooted in the memory of previous editions rather than current rules. The idea that “Deep Striking is a special form of movement normally used when coming from reserves,” is again a distinction without clear support in the rules. Deep Strike is not a decision made at the time a unit enters play, nor is it done from the normal reserve pool. A unit which uses Deep Strike entry to the table does so from a special reserve; “When placing the unit in reserve, you must tell your opponent that it will be arriving by Deep Strike (sometimes called Deep Strike reserve).” The choice is then made at the beginning of the game which route the unit will take to the table and, from there, the unit simply moves via the path available to it.
Which brings us to B) that the Deep Strike Mishap takes precedence over all other considerations. I understand where this argument come from, but I don't see any actual text indicating that it takes precedence- meaning the opposite case is not automatically disqualified.
Consequently; a Tank arriving by Tank Shock forces non-vehicle units to move at least 1” away from its final resting place. Full stop. Should the Tank arrive within 1” of an enemy unit it would Mishap. However, again, I have found no actual text to indicate why the Deep Strike Mishap would trigger prior to obstructing unit(s) clearing a path. In fact, referring to the Tank Shock rules it seems very clear that under no circumstances will more than one model remain in the path of a Tank Shocking vehicle, and that that single model is destroyed should they fail to Immobilize or destroy the vehicle with their single attack, meaning that even in such a case the landing point is cleared.
Finally, and this is perhaps the most confusing argument I've yet seen so I didn't even count it, somehow tanks from the sky (or thin air) are somehow less scary than tanks coming over a hill? I am unsure how Fearless warriors will move out of the way of a tank driving towards them at a good clip- remember the effect of a successful Morale check vs Tank Shock is that they let the vehicle pass, or move out of its way if it stops on their location- but two kids running a lemonade stand suddenly think that same Tank falling through the air treat it as the least important thing in the world. Even for teleporting units; a guy walking his dog sees an area the size of a city block start to materialize on top of him, and his choice is to stand his ground? Can you seriously tell me that the results of a Monolith's pilot choosing to fully materialize with a guardsman overlapping his hull would go better for the person than the Monolith itself? If the threat of materializing inside solid rock is present, why is the threat of being materialized around a threat to insignificant things which try to block the path of something the size of a building.
While it has been suggested that some complex set of rules would be necessary to accommodate the various methods of Deep Strike which might be executed, I fail to see evidence of this. A collision, is a collision, is a collision- most of the rules I'm arguing would allow Deep Strike protection are focused on avoiding such collisions.
If you've stayed with me through all of that, thank you for your time. I look forward to any responses.
nosferatu1001 wrote: The initial placement of the marker, where you would like the unit to arrive, is most definitely not movement. Neither is the scatter, if any.
The mishap resolves first because the unit never arrives, meaning its movement has not ended, and the skimmer rules never kick in.
nosferatu1001 wrote: The initial placement of the marker, where you would like the unit to arrive, is most definitely not movement. Neither is the scatter, if any.
The mishap resolves first because the unit never arrives, meaning its movement has not ended, and the skimmer rules never kick in.
Then declaring you are tank shocking would force the unit to move first. Because the roll for leadership is made before the unit finishes it's move, so tank shocking while deep striking the unit might move out of the way first.
Also note, there is only 2 ways for the skimmer rules to kick in, and they are both enemy actions/weapons. If you disallow deep strike tank shocking, then you need to disallow the third remaining option for the skimmer forced movement ending rule. which is ending over a an enemy model that you moved over while tank shocking a different unit with your skimmer, as tank shock is instead of moving normally. This rule really needs an FAQ. Same as Drop Pods, because as written those don't function the way they are played either.
nosferatu1001 wrote: The initial placement of the marker, where you would like the unit to arrive, is most definitely not movement. Neither is the scatter, if any.
I explicitly agreed with these statements already, and feel that neither has bearing on what is actually being represented or the rules by which it is resolved.
nosferatu1001 wrote: The mishap resolves first because the unit never arrives, meaning its movement has not ended, and the skimmer rules never kick in.
I believe this to be the source of our disconnect and disagreement. Why does it never arrive?
In terms of Skimmers, your argument seems circular to me (it arrives on a unit because its special rule doesn't kick in, and its special rule doesn't kick in because it doesn't arrive), and I'm not seeing the part of the text from which you are drawing that conclusion.
As you directly address the Skimmer part of this discussion, I read the section on pg 38 of the BRB as carving out several exceptions to normal movement for skimmers which seem directly applicable to the Deep Strike rules, including; “Skimmers can move over friendly and enemy models...” this would imply, to me, that the issue of proximity does not arrive until the termination of the move.
Though you do not address the idea of Tank Striking, I believe that the key point of discussion (failure to arrive) is similarly relevant to most people's reasoning. In the case of arriving on an enemy unit; I believe that, if declared, the Tank Shock rules are controlling because the tank does not stop unless forced to do so by a Death or Glory resulting in an Immobilized or Explodes result or dealing sufficient HP damage to destroy the vehicle outright. To expand on my previous discussion of that point, and provide the text I which is central to my logic, I believe the controlling text is on page 85 of the BRB where it says;
“If an enemy unit other than an enemy vehicle is reached, that enemy unit must take a Morale check and immediately Fall Back if it fails. If the test is passed, the unit simply lets the Tank move through, as if it was not there. Regardless of the result of the test, the Tank keeps moving straight on, possibly tank shocking more enemy units until it reaches its final position.”
This directly states that the tank may move through an enemy unit, ignoring its presence, and, more importantly for our discussion; DOES NOT STOP. From other discussions regarding Tank Shock there appears to be a common perception that a tank stops at each unit it reaches, does a series of checks, then continues driving. I would guess that perception arises from the fact that in practical terms that is how gameplay is resolved, but it seems clear to me that is not the rules effect of what is occurring and thus should not be considered so for evaluation of other actions.
Regarding ending its movement where an enemy unit is, the next paragraph reads;
“If some enemy models in the enemy unit would end up underneath the vehicle then it reaches its final position (it makes no difference whether the unit is falling back or not), these models must be moved out of the way by the shortest distance, leaving at least 1" between them and the vehicle whilst maintaining unit coherency and staying on the board.”
Thus, a Tank Shock does not stop prior to arriving at its destination, and upon arrival (living) enemy units cannot have remained in the way its arrival.
All of which result in no reason that the Tank would not arrive at its target destination.
I take it that you agree with nosferatu1001's assessment of these rules. As neither of you provide it, I would very much like the RAW or FAQ textual basis for this opinion.
You cannot deep strike and tank shock as a unit clearly requires the ability to move normally that turn to tank shock. Deep striking doesn't allow for normal movement.
Deep strike requires you to be deployed on the board correctly, there is no protection anywhere in the rules to override the requirement of needing to be deployed correctly because deep strike isn't movement, it's deployment.
So you cannot be tank shocking during deployment as you don't have the ability to move normally that turn and until you're deployed correctly you're not on the board and don't count as moving until you're deployed correctly.
Scatter is prior to the unit arriving. It is not movement. Only AFTER you complete DS have you moved.
So, when you land within 1" of an enemy model you Mishap. This isnt movement YET - due to the already quoted DS rules - so you have no permission to move the enemy models. You cannot deploy there, as you have no permission to do so - you must instead Mishap.
Find a rules allowance to NOT mishap, as required by the DS rules. Find permission to treat the final scatter position as movement. ANYTHING to suport your side, as you have no rules basis for anything you have stated. Nothing at all that is different from the prior posts, anyway
Find permission to Tank Shock Deep strike. The rules for Tank Shock cannot be completed, as you cannot pivot and move a number of inches. You have no measuring point, either. So, given you cannot complete the requirements for a TS, you cannot TS. So remove that idea.
liturgies of blood wrote: You cannot deep strike and tank shock as a unit clearly requires the ability to move normally that turn to tank shock.
Based on what? How are you defining “move normally?” What text makes it clear? I've already provided RAW that indicates Deep Strike is a movement, with all that entails. What are you deriving your assessment from?
liturgies of blood wrote: Deep strike requires you to be deployed on the board correctly, there is no protection anywhere in the rules to override the requirement of needing to be deployed correctly.
Again, based on what? During deployment you place the unit into reserve (“sometimes called Deep Strike reserve”). During play you move the unit to the table. I don't see anything in the Deep Strike rules about “deploying” to the table with Deep Strike (though, I think I saw that in a previous edition). I am not suggesting that you be allowed to move or end movement illegally. I am providing rules that state the nature of that movement and limitations of its ending may not be precisely what people assume they are and may allow certain vehicles more safety in Deep Strike than seems to be generally assumed.
I am, further, asking for someone to provide actual game-controlling text to substantiate the opposing stance. What I have seen, and heard in local discussions, are assertions that “that just isn't how it works.” From some of those local discussions I am absolutely certain that's not how it worked in previous editions. However, in previous editions the Monolith had layers of Deep Strike protection written into its entry. I'm fairly certain no one is arguing that we should allow the unit to keep those protections just because they existed in a now obsolete codex. Why are we, then, expecting that the RAW interaction in rules (Deep Strike, Tank Shock, and Skimmers) to work the same way despite some fairly graphic and well established differences between the editions, such as assaults and fliers, without providing actual rules or FAQ text?
I don't have to define move normally, deep strike forbids it and tank shock requires it.
Page 34 2nd paragraph from bottom of left column. "In the Movement phase... may not move any further...." that forbids moving as normal.
As for the word deployed or deployment in deep strike... read mishaps that requires you deploy properly otherwise you're not deployed and other stuff could happen. You are required to be outside 1" of an enemy model. That is further than the protection that the skimmer rules grant(even if we go with your reading of the rules) so again, you cannot drop on a unit and go "hey tank shock" as there is 2 rules preventing you landing there, the 1st is deep strike and moreover if you were normally moving you'd have to be declaring tank shock before you pull that as normal movement forbids it.
Where? The only thing I see is a reference to pg 85, Tank Shock “instead of moving normally.” which is then caveated lower on the page, in the other column “A Tank that moves onto the battlefield from reserve may attempt a Tank Shock. This must be declared before the Tank moves onto the board.” So; normal movement, except when it's coming from reserve...
So, when you land within 1" of an enemy model you Mishap. This isnt movement YET - due to the already quoted DS rules - so you have no permission to move the enemy models. You cannot deploy there, as you have no permission to do so - you must instead Mishap.
Find a rules allowance to NOT mishap, as required by the DS rules. Find permission to treat the final scatter position as movement. ANYTHING to suport your side, as you have no rules basis for anything you have stated. Nothing at all that is different from the prior posts, anyway
I've already addressed why I think I've met these requirements and that there are rules which cover situations at least as specific as Deep Strike. I've quoted several sections of RAW that I feel support my stance. If you believe I have not done so I would respectfully ask that you review my posts above. After making my own review of this thread I see minimal citations supporting your view, and none which I feel I have not specifically addressed. If you feel otherwise please point them out.
Find permission to Tank Shock Deep strike. The rules for Tank Shock cannot be completed, as you cannot pivot and move a number of inches. You have no measuring point, either. So, given you cannot complete the requirements for a TS, you cannot TS. So remove that idea.
You cannot “pivot” in a traditional sense when entering from reserves via a board edge, yet the rules clearly, explicitly, and with a bold heading allow for it. Actually, speaking of that bold heading and the permissions you asked me to find...
Meanwhile, there is no need for measurement of distance to generate a Tank Shock. The requirement is that you move Combat Speed, which Deep Strike clearly states you exceed in text I have quoted above, verbatim. If you need a number of inches and direction, the direction is “to the table” and the number of inches is whatever the number is that is required to reach the table from reserve.
liturgies of blood wrote: I don't have to define move normally, deep strike forbids it and tank shock requires it.
Page 34 2nd paragraph from bottom of left column. "In the Movement phase... may not move any further...." that forbids moving as normal.
I'm sorry, but that quote forbids *moving*any*further*... I believe I addressed this already.
“In the Movement phase during which they arrive, deep striking units may not move any further...” (BRB, p36- Deep Strike) The phrase “any further” clearly indicates that the writers considered the the unit to have moved.
liturgies of blood wrote: As for the word deployed or deployment in deep strike... read mishaps that requires you deploy properly otherwise you're not deployed...
Yes, a certain mishap event allows your opponent to deploy the unit anywhere on the table (with exclusions). I don't see a reasonable logic path from “one of the mishaps allows the opponent to deploy” to “all deep strike is deployment.” The same section includes landing in a proper Deep Strike formation... without rolling for scatter. Can I generalize that part of the mishap to the non-mishap arrival rules as well? I would say no, but the point is that I view this statement as doing exactly that.
Deep strike is deployment... it says that in the 2nd paragraph of deep strike. If you cannot deploy on the board you get a mishap so deepstriking is a way to deploy a unit. That you cannot understand that is enough to understand that you don't get these rules.
liturgies of blood wrote: Deep strike is deployment... it says that in the 2nd paragraph of deep strike. If you cannot deploy on the board you get a mishap so deepstriking is a way to deploy a unit.
I'll have to consider this. I'm not entirely convinced that single word negates the concept, but it's more potential denial from the text than I had before.
liturgies of blood wrote: That you cannot understand that is enough to understand that you don't get these rules.
Really? Insults because I missed one word that it took me half a page of prompting to get you to hone in on? If it was that obvious why did you go for the mishap usage first? Or are you just upset because I expect some rigor and support behind assertions rather than just accepting “it works that way because I say so. It says something about it somewhere, go figure out my point on your own?” You can cease participating at any time if you feel meeting my standards and ensuring your points are understandable is beneath you.
I went to mishap first as it also dealt with what happens when you land on a unit, the crux of what you're talking about. Every other section on the page also uses the term deploy so it's not a big leap to say that if you're missing the relevant words to the discussion you're missing the point of the rules. If you take that as an insult that's up to you, feel free to report me rather than talk up your ivory tower.
A single word can easily derail an assumption that you are on the board before you've deployed correctly.
Lit - I think you need to slow down and use punctuation. From your last two posts, depending on how you parse them, there are several times you can come of as condescending, as well as a flagrant insult / tell off in the last.
liturgies of blood wrote: I went to mishap first as it also dealt with what happens when you land on a unit, the crux of what you're talking about.
The mishap table is actually what this whole process centers around trying to avoid getting on to, so I'm not sure how you see it as the crux of what I'm talking about.
liturgies of blood wrote: Every other section on the page also uses the term deploy so it's not a big leap to say that if you're missing the relevant words to the discussion you're missing the point of the rules. If you take that as an insult that's up to you, feel free to report me rather than talk up your ivory tower.
Is that a relevant word? Is it the key word to the discussion? We'll circle back to that in a second.
How about the assumption that someone who has a post count equal to their participation in this discussion is new to the game... so perhaps unfamiliarity rather than inability? How about just not being a jerk? I've made a single request; support your statements. Getting you to do that, rather than you make statements and expecting me to do your research, has been like pulling teeth. Three posts ago you could have said “it uses the word deployment all through the Deep Strike section, deployment is defined on page XX as precluding XYZ” (it is defined that way somewhere, right?) I haven't read much on these forums, but somewhere around here I saw a document that said that it's an individual poster's responsibility to support their statements, especially when asked for RAW. I think that also said something about arguing points rather than people. Now, maybe you didn't mean it to be insulting... but I'm not sure how you measure “that you can't understand” as anything other than personal. Really, the phrase ivory tower is pretty pejorative, but I'm willing to ignore that in the spirit of actually having a discussion about rules. That is why you're here, I assume, to have a polite discussion about rules... without either of us talking down to the other. If not, I do, in fact, know how reports work.
liturgies of blood wrote: A single word can easily derail an assumption that you are on the board before you've deployed correctly.
Sure, a single word can... depends on how the word is defined. I don't see it clearly defined anywhere, particularly in a special rule sense which precludes the application of “movement.” In practice it seems to be used to describe any entry on to the board- including arrival from normal Reserves (p 124; “When Reserves arrive, the player picks any one of the units arriving and deploys it...”) which explicitly allows tank shock, and thus would fail to mean that word, by itself as used in the Deep Strike entry, derails my equation of deep strike from reserves with board edge entry from reserves.
Landing within 1" of an enemy unit is a cause for a mishap. You are actively trying to deploy a unit, on top of an enemy unit. That is why mishap is important to the discussion and the crux of what you are talking about IMHO.
Deployment, the act of deploying a unit on the board, is relevant as both myself and Nos were talking about the requirement to deploy the unit and fulfill those requirements of the deep strike USR. If you are not deployed you cannot tank shock as you're not on the board and not in play. If you land within 1" of an enemy model you're not deployed correctly as per the rules of DS and then we move to mishap.
You've not shown an allowance to be within 1" of an enemy model when deploying. This needs to be clearly shown as you have a specific restriction on how you arrive on the board, without a more specific permission to over-rule this restriction there is no tank shock. More specific>specific>general.
Moving normally and arriving from reserves normally or by outflank are not mutually exclusive, a tank can come in from outflank and tank shock the hell out of my back lines because it could move normally that turn. Moving normally and deepstrike are mutually exclusive as you do not move any further and there are the restrictions imposed by deep strike that you have yet to counter. When deep striking you cannot declare how many inches you're moving, nor the direction, nor any of the other requirements of tank shock.
Since I have answered your request for a quote of where I draw my inspiration, I hope there won't be any teeth pulled to get an answer to this:
Where does tank shock allow you to override DS's restriction to remain outside 1" of an enemy model during deployment? Tank shock allows movement through enemies but to move you have to be in play .
In the movement phase during which they arrived, deepstriking units may not move any further...
next paragraph
In that unit's shooting phase, these units count as having moved.
So during movement, you can not move, and you don't have the counts as moved until the shooting phase.
pg 85, tank shock
When moving a tank, the player can declare that it is going to attempt the tank shock instead of moving normally
As moving normally is not allowed to occur, you don't believe you can replace it with a tank shock. This assumes that "moving normally" is defined as everything in the movement section of the book. Deep strike is not in that section, so is not moving normally and can not be replaced by a tank shock. Also, as others said, deep striking is deploying that latter makes the model count as having moved, but is not actual movement.
Just like to point something out to silentone2k, may or may not be relevant.
Now I can't give a page and graph because I'm at work and my book is at home but IIRC isn't deep strike not *technically* reserve RAW? Doesn't it say that during deployment units with the rule may elect to enter deep strike "sometimes called deep strike reserve".
Doesn't the fact that it uses another name exclude it from the permission of tank shocking from reserve? As it is not in "reserve" but "deep strike reserve"?
Could be wrong.
liturgies of blood wrote: Landing within 1" of an enemy unit is a cause for a mishap. You are actively trying to deploy a unit, on top of an enemy unit. That is why mishap is important to the discussion and the crux of what you are talking about IMHO.
Single words; if you go back to my original post I'm not “trying” to deploy on top of an enemy unit. Mishap is only a feature of the situation after the moment where we're talking about passes; if you're right then we go to the mishap table and all continues normally, if I'm right we don't get to the mishap table and it has nothing to do with the situation. Thus, nothing about the rules actually within the mishap table seem applicable to this discussion.
liturgies of blood wrote: Deployment, the act of deploying a unit on the board, is relevant as both myself and Nos were talking about the requirement to deploy the unit and fulfill those requirements of the deep strike USR. If you are not deployed you cannot tank shock as you're not on the board and not in play. If you land within 1" of an enemy model you're not deployed correctly as per the rules of DS and then we move to mishap.
You've not shown an allowance to be within 1" of an enemy model when deploying. This needs to be clearly shown as you have a specific restriction on how you arrive on the board, without a more specific permission to over-rule this restriction there is no tank shock. More specific>specific>general.
I'm not trying to show that you are allowed to arrive within 1”. I'm trying to show that these rules create a situation where specific vehicles or the models “under” them are shifted outside that 1” bubble.
As for the restriction to make you unable to tank shock until after being deployed, the Tank Shock From Reserve text specifically says otherwise; tank shock must be declared *before* arriving on the table.
liturgies of blood wrote: Moving normally and arriving from reserves normally or by outflank are not mutually exclusive, a tank can come in from outflank and tank shock the hell out of my back lines because it could move normally that turn. Moving normally and deepstrike are mutually exclusive as you do not move any further and there are the restrictions imposed by deep strike that you have yet to counter. When deep striking you cannot declare how many inches you're moving, nor the direction, nor any of the other requirements of tank shock.
The text for neither normal reserve arrival nor outflank carry any requirement that the model be placed on the table edge and then moved. In fact it specifically says that this is incorrect. The RAW is that the unit *moves*into*play*. Deep strike is simply a move from a non 2D direction.
liturgies of blood wrote: Since I have answered your request for a quote of where I draw my inspiration, I hope there won't be any teeth pulled to get an answer to this:
Where does tank shock allow you to override DS's restriction to remain outside 1" of an enemy model during deployment? Tank shock allows movement through enemies but to move you have to be in play .
I have never claimed that tank shock overrides the DS restriction to remain outside 1”. My disagreement is with one of your underlying assumptions, as addressed above. My claim is that the rules specifically allow tank shock from reserve, allowing you to force your opponent to give ground and thus prevent you from ever being within 1”.
...[T]he following two textual statements … directly counteract the idea it is some sort of non-movement action; “In the Movement phase during which they arrive, deep striking units may not move any further...” (BRB, p36- Deep Strike) The phrase “any further” clearly indicates that the writers considered the the unit to have moved. Then, in the next paragraph, you find a passage previously cited as; “In that turn's Shooting phase, these units can fire (or Run) as normal, and ... count as having moved in the previous Movement phase.” The argument forwarded being that they only “count as having moved for purposes of shooting.” and have not actually moved. This may be a reasonable interpretation, except that I have omitted the word “obviously.” Counting as having moved if the unit has not “actually moved” seems like it would preclude obviousness.
When moving a tank, the player can declare that it is going to attempt the tank shock instead of moving normally
As moving normally is not allowed to occur, you don't believe you can replace it with a tank shock. This assumes that "moving normally" is defined as everything in the movement section of the book. Deep strike is not in that section, so is not moving normally and can not be replaced by a tank shock. Also, as others said, deep striking is deploying that latter makes the model count as having moved, but is not actual movement.
Just my two cents.
Again, further down and in the second column of that same page;
“A Tank that moves onto the battlefield from reserve may attempt a Tank Shock. This must be declared before the Tank moves onto the board.”
This indicates, to me, that entry from reserves is either not considered normal movement and thus has its own specific exception, which then reasonably extends to other non-standard reserve entries such as outflank and, consequently, deep strike or that the exception was made specifically to cover non-standard movement entry.
Tactical_Genius wrote: Just like to point something out to silentone2k, may or may not be relevant.
Now I can't give a page and graph because I'm at work and my book is at home but IIRC isn't deep strike not *technically* reserve RAW? Doesn't it say that during deployment units with the rule may elect to enter deep strike "sometimes called deep strike reserve".
Doesn't the fact that it uses another name exclude it from the permission of tank shocking from reserve? As it is not in "reserve" but "deep strike reserve"?
Could be wrong.
P 36; “In order for a unit to be able to Deep Strike, all models in the unit must have the Deep strike special rule and the unit must start the game in reserve. When placing the unit in reserve, you must tell your opponent that it will be arriving by Deep Strike (sometimes called Deep Strike reserve).”
The way it reads, to me, is the same reserve just different paths from it. The consequence being most akin to two units on the table choosing whether to go through difficult terrain or around it.
Ruled the other way raises the question “can you tank shock from outflank?” as the RAW of that ability is very similar.
First place one model from the unit anywhere on the table, in the position where you would like it to arrive and roll for it to scatter to determine the models final position."
can you place a model on top of enemy models?
If someone placed a monolith on top of my resin krieg i would get quite pissed off.
Pageg 85. "Tank shock from reserve
A tank that moves onto the battlefield from reserve may attempt a tank shock. "
As you "place" the deep striking unit it is not "moving onto the board" as opposed to normal reserves (pg. 124 "When a reserve unit arrives, it must move fully onto the table from the controlling player's own table edge") and outflank (pg. 40 "models move onto the table as described for other reserves")
If games workshop wanted to allow tank shock from deepstrike wouldn't they have stated in the vehicle section or deepstrike rule that if a vehicle scatters onto infantry it counts as a tank shock?
When you move on from reserve, that is a "normal" move
Unless you Deep Strike. Deep Strike is most definitely NOT a normal move. If you claim it is the same as an ormal move - prove it. Page and paragraph that states DS is a *normal* move.
It IS a move, just not a normal one.
But hey, we can Imagine you can come up with rules to support it being a normal move. Move onto your next contention - that you can TTank Shock, because you are not required to declare the inches you will move?
Did you even read the 6th edition TS rules? The bolded rule sentence states as such! So no, unles you can prove that you can declare the number of inches for the DS rule you are going to move, and then actually MOVE that number of inches, you cannot Tank Shock, as I stated. You cannot fulfill any of the other requirements either, but I pointed out the key first one you couldnt complete.
While you keep claiming you want rules, when directed to them you are ignoring them, or just not bothering to read them.
First place one model from the unit anywhere on the table, in the position where you would like it to arrive and roll for it to scatter to determine the models final position."
can you place a model on top of enemy models?
If someone placed a monolith on top of my resin krieg i would get quite pissed off.
Per the rules, yes. Actually, per the rules, a player who assumes they will scatter at about 6 inches (not an unreasonable assumption statistically) can already place a model on top of your resin kreig if they think that's their best chance of ending with a safe deep strike.
There are lots of things about this game that piss me off. My soldiers getting wiped out, snap shots at fliers, the price of miniatures... being angry doesn't change that it is the way the game is played.
In practice, this is probably going to be a little more polite- such as when you place a blast or large blast template and don't actually touch your opponent's models (at least I generally don't).
A tank that moves onto the battlefield from reserve may attempt a tank shock. "
As you "place" the deep striking unit it is not "moving onto the board" as opposed to normal reserves (pg. 124 "When a reserve unit arrives, it must move fully onto the table from the controlling player's own table edge") and outflank (pg. 40 "models move onto the table as described for other reserves")
p36 (deep strike) “First, place one model from the unit anywhere on the table, in the position where you would like it to arrive, and roll for scatter to determine the model's final position.”
Thus, you place, then you scatter, then the placed model performs it's actual movement- from reserves to the scattered location. That seems fairly straightforward. The randomness of the models final position is not particularly different from the way blast and large blast templates work nor is the application of final movement destination for units unique to this rule in 40k.
DOOMONYOU wrote: If games workshop wanted to allow tank shock from deepstrike wouldn't they have stated in the vehicle section or deepstrike rule that if a vehicle scatters onto infantry it counts as a tank shock?
I'm not saying that all scattering on to infantry counts as tank shock. Tank shock is a choice made by the moving player (and possibly not always the optimal one). However, in the section on tank shock they did state that it is a choice allowable from reserves. Deep strike is a type of movement from reserves, ergo...
Unless you Deep Strike. Deep Strike is most definitely NOT a normal move. If you claim it is the same as an ormal move - prove it. Page and paragraph that states DS is a *normal* move.
It IS a move, just not a normal one.
But hey, we can Imagine you can come up with rules to support it being a normal move.
You need imagine nothing. For one thing I have never, intentionally, claimed that Deep Strike is “normal movement.” I have cited, several times, the statement on page 85 that explicitly says “A Tank that moves onto the battlefield from reserve may attempt a tank shock.” As I have previously stated, this either means that no reserve movement is a “normal move” and carves an exception for all such movement or it has no application to normal reserve entry(/deployment) and carves an exception for abnormal movement entry(/deployment).
I am uncertain what other purpose this block of text as written would serve.
nosferatu1001 wrote: Move onto your next contention - that you can TTank Shock, because you are not required to declare the inches you will move?
Yes. Did you? Have you actually read any of my posts and considered the rules and interpretations presented?
More to the point, please be civil or step away from the conversation.
nosferatu1001 wrote: The bolded rule sentence states as such! So no, unles you can prove that you can declare the number of inches for the DS rule you are going to move, and then actually MOVE that number of inches, you cannot Tank Shock, as I stated. You cannot fulfill any of the other requirements either, but I pointed out the key first one you couldnt complete.
If you want to parse that bold sentence, the bolded rule states “declare how many inches the vehicle is going to move, up to its maximum speed.”
There are two answers to this;
1) 0. This is the number of board inches moved and is clearly less than maximum speed, but see below.
2) Declare the number of inches required to arrive on the board via deep strike, however your opponent wants to measure that. Pre-measurement allows you to figure out what that distance is prior to it needing to be declared and thus it can be declared. The Deep Strike rules clearly allow you to move whatever distance that is, making that your effective maximum speed during that movement.
I think the controlling sentence is actually the one which follows the bolded section; “The vehicle must move at least Combat Speed.” This brings us to the “count as having moved cruising speed” phrase in the deep strike rules. This is interpreted to mean that they are only considered to have moved during the shooting phase. Except that the use of the word “obviously” in the previous sentence implies they have moved during that phase... at what speed? There is applicable text is that following sentence; “cruising speed.”
And I think I owe someone above an apology, as I believe I switched the sentence they were referencing with the previous one. I think this addresses their comment, however.
nosferatu1001 wrote: While you keep claiming you want rules, when directed to them you are ignoring them, or just not bothering to read them.
Disagreeing with your interpretation is not the same as ignoring or not bothering to read the rules. I feel I have explicitly and directly addressed every rule and interpretation suggested at a fairly detailed level, with citations, and repeatedly. A set of courtesies (among several) you have not returned.
In practice, this is probably going to be a little more polite- such as when you place a blast or large blast template and don't actually touch your opponent's models (at least I generally don't).
Any time a unit has a move attack it isn't placed on the unit. such as tyranid mawloc or hadesdrill, the blast/large blast template is used.
tank shock doesn't use the template, it uses the model when it moves.
If you can't place the model, as you must when deep striking, you can't do it.
In practice, this is probably going to be a little more polite- such as when you place a blast or large blast template and don't actually touch your opponent's models (at least I generally don't).
Any time a unit has a move attack it isn't placed on the unit. such as tyranid mawloc or hadesdrill, the blast/large blast template is used.
tank shock doesn't use the template, it uses the model when it moves.
If you can't place the model, as you must when deep striking, you can't do it.
I'm not concerned about placing the model, I'm trying to be polite. I'll show you my monolith will fit, absent the troops that will have to vacate or be crushed, by holding it over them- the same as a template. If you don't want to work with that I'll set my model down and show you it will fit on the crushed troops. I'm not sure what you gain if you choose to be a stickler for how my model gets placed... but I'm not the one losing there.
Arriving via DS by the contention in your previous post about per measuring and moving led me to this absurd situation.
You roll to arrive with your monolith as a tank shock. You don't scatter so you are going to land on my unit. I then perform a death or glory on you and immobilize your vehicle. As per the tank shock rules you move no further. You were "moving" at me from a vertical direction. Your monolith is now immobilized in mid air above the table just above my models.
What happens now? How do we resolve this situation?
Disclaimer, and I probably should have put this up front;
Do I intend to play with this?
Not unless a FAQ shows up explicitly allowing it. I don't argue rules during a game (unless it's spectacularly clear) and I can't imagine a situation where the argument spawned by attempting this without clear GW sanction would take less time than the game itself.
Do I think this is Rules as Intended;
No. I think this is something the designers never dreamed of. I think that it will be FAQ'd out of existence fairly quickly. I think that is sad because tanks falling from the sky and crushing people is way cooler and more epic than getting shunted into hyperspace by a little kid that's wondered onto the battlefield. The only thing I can think of which would be more epic than that would be the day someone's character managed to Death or Glory a brand-new Landraider or Monolith on Deep Strike, causing the thing to wreck. One-hit killing it on entry and effectively puling a superman- throwing a tank aside that's about to crush their buddies.
If I don't plan on using it and don't think it was intended, why am I arguing this then?
Because it's the RAW. That's part of what this forum is for, right? Debating what the rules actually say?
It's also part of how I learn games, and how I improve my knowledge of games. It's how I check myself from making assumptions based on what I “know,” especially if that knowledge is incorrect due to being a rule from another edition, another game, or simply misreading of the text.
The point of my asking how to resolve it that if there is no resolution within the rules, your ability to DS and tank shock at the same time creates a break in the game. That must mean your interpretation of said rules is incorrect.
You aren't within 1' of my models and so you do not mishap. The rules for a model being fully on the board deal with the edges of the board as far as I remember. I may be wrong there. Even if you were to have misshaped, to continue to resolve the mishap would require movement (as you have previously pointed out that DS must be movement) therefore you cannot move as you are now immobilized. We are now at an impass in the game as far as I would not be surprised if I missed something here.
The tank shock rule spells the bit of models ending up under it. They move the shortest distance out from under the tank's final position, while maintaining coherency. Or you could use the skimmers rule, that moves the skimmer off the models, when it is forced to end on top of other models. Though as a tank shock it should be the models moved out from under the tank.
Just an additional note, it is entirely possible for a regular tank shock to end on some models in a unit, as DoG must be a model the tank would move over. This means the lascannon guy 4 guys back could be the stopping point ending the tanks move on the first 4 members of the squad.
Neither of those rules would apply as your model, as per the death and glory rule, must stop before reaching my unit. I am not actually under your monolith as you are not actually on the table. Your base must be placed just above my models as that is the direction you tank shocked me in.
The 2nd part of your post would not be possible in a DS situation as your direction of travel is straight down so you won't end up on top of any model if my DoG stops you. You'd be touching all models at once rather than the first model in your path if your path was 2 dimensional.
Lehnsherr wrote: Arriving via DS by the contention in your previous post about per measuring and moving led me to this absurd situation.
You roll to arrive with your monolith as a tank shock. You don't scatter so you are going to land on my unit. I then perform a death or glory on you and immobilize your vehicle. As per the tank shock rules you move no further. You were "moving" at me from a vertical direction. Your monolith is now immobilized in mid air above the table just above my models.
What happens now? How do we resolve this situation?
I can't imagine anything good for me. There are three possibilities;
1) The best interpretation is the Skimmer rule applies, and the Monolith slides off. If the skimmer rule does not apply, or we have a deep striking land raider instead, we move on.
2) Next is that I have arrived in an illegal location and now stumble onto the mishap table.
3) I cannot, currently, find the third applicable rule, which was that being stopped during a Tank Shock prior to fully entering the table resulted in automatic destruction. Absent that rule, one of the first two would apply.
Lehnsherr wrote: The point of my asking how to resolve it that if there is no resolution within the rules, your ability to DS and tank shock at the same time creates a break in the game. That must mean your interpretation of said rules is incorrect.
Perfectly fair question and perfectly reasonable assumption.
Lehnsherr wrote: You aren't within 1' of my models and so you do not mishap. The rules for a model being fully on the board deal with the edges of the board as far as I remember. I may be wrong there. Even if you were to have misshaped, to continue to resolve the mishap would require movement (as you have previously pointed out that DS must be movement) therefore you cannot move as you are now immobilized. We are now at an impass in the game as far as I would not be surprised if I missed something here.
I disagree that I wouldn't be within 1” of your models, Death or Glory definitely happens within 1”. Regardless I think I've covered the possibilities above.
It is worth noting that otherwise permanently immobile units can still enter the game via Deep Strike and, in fact, must do so per the first sentence on pg 125. Pg 36 notes that even immobile vehicles are considered to have moved cruising speed when arriving...
There are many things in this game that are not covered in the rules. Weapons that wound versus LD instead of Toughness spring to mind. There is no rule to cover this yet most everyone simply substitutes majority LD for majority T. Just because someone puts forth a question that does not have a clear RAW solution does not mean it is not legal, it means we as players have to fill in the gaps that are left by the framework that is the rules.
I believe there is a rule about coming in from reserve and not making it onto the table due to immobilization in the vehicle section. Will have to check on this and post what I find.
As you have pointed out you can have a deep striking land raider so lets ignore the skimmer rule for now.
You have said that deep striking must be movement. If you are immobilized and are then required to move your model as per the mishap table, how then are you able to move?
What I am saying is that if deployment via DS is considered movement, then resolving any of the mishap table results that require you to place the vehicle back in reserve must also be movement. However we now have a specific situation in which you are attempting to resolve the "mishap movement" while your vehicle is immobilized. Resolving a mishap is much less specific than resolving a mishap on an immobilized vehicle, when we have defined all DS to also be movement. Your vehicle would be unable to move and the game would once again break.
Of course the counter argument would be the mishap table is not movement but my question would be why? Why would mishap not be movement if DS is and they are all part of the same overall "move"?
As far as the skimmer rule goes, it requires you to slide the vehicle if the skimmer is "on top" or I am "under" the skimmer. In this situation underneath means we physically occupy the same space on the board and thus one of us must be moved. I am not under your skimmer I am below your skimmer. We do not occupy the same space in the game and neither of us would need to be moved. Remember, your base must be placed above my unit, not just the model. Once again we arrive in the situation in which you are immobilized above my unit with no way of continuing the game.
Edit
Grav, you are right in that many situations arise in which a situation becomes unclear on how to resolve. However in This situation we have 1 interpretation of a rule which breaks the game and one interpretation (DS is not movement and therefore you cannot TS from a DS) that does not break the game. When you arise in a situation like this you must use the interpretation that does not break the game.
Edit again
Just to further a previous post by Nosferatu in regards to filling all the requirements of a Tank Shock.
First turn the vehicle on the spot to face the direction you intend to move it... With 3 dimensions this could be rather difficult. You intend to move downward, not something specifically permitted by the rules of movement.
Declare how many inches you are going to move up to your maximum speed... You addressed this earlier with your pre-measuring idea. However, where do we determine the point at which your vehicle starts from (above the board). Do you just get to pick? The space above the board is actual game space, so you cant really start anywhere in there. You can't be in the game space, while simultaneously not be in the game space, as reserves require you to do.
Once aimed... move the tank straight forwards until it comes into contact with an enemy unit... I am not sure straight forward can be interpreted as downward. Furthermore, you must move straight forward, yet the ability to scatter on a deep strike means there is a possibility you do not move straight forward. Its not simply a "failed tank shock" we literally are not allowed to do this. The fact that this can happen is yet another big issue with the interpretation.
Finally, if we allow a DS vehicle to perform a Tank Shock, then we have the rather large can of worms opened up about what happens when a Tank Shocking vehicle declares a Ram from Deep Strike. I haven't even considered what happens here, but thinking about it makes my head hurt.
I fail to see how it "breaks" the game. Much like the LD vs T it is simply not covered.
Immobile models are still moved by the Mawloc even though they are not given a permission to override the Immobilization.
Becoming immobilized while coming onto the board is actually covered on pg 124 of the BRB oddly enough due to the way that it is worded, RAW, the Tank Shocking Deep Striker would be given enough move to move onto the board at a board edge. So the "floating" model would be moved over to the closest board edge and have it's back edge aligned with it. Now since the section on this is based off coming onto the board at the board edge it could simply be construed that the model continues down and would stop at the first available spot that it could occupy the board at, in this case that center of the unit. Since it was tank shocking then the unit would have to move out of the way but from there on it would be immobilized. This all still hinges on a number of assumptions that I am not comfortable making. I don't agree with skimmer rules or TS working with DS but in the end this is a framework and YMMV.
Edit: As far as ramming with DS based off most rulings with strikes coming from above you rule it to be side armour in both cases.
This thread is a waste of time. It is clear that the necromancer feels that what happens prior to deployment is movement, that it is movement despite not meeting the DS criteria for deployment and won't be swayed. The 1" rule still destroys this assumption, even if the skimmer protection mattered it still falls pray to the 1" rule. The rules have been given, the DS restrictions have not been overcome by any rules, let's get this locked and move on to what really matters: Why in a universe where they can cast kilometer long ships between the stars do people cross the galaxy to fight with swords?
I am not familiar with the Mawloc ability that allows a model to move while being immobilized. If you could clarify I would appreciate it.
In this case though, we are using movement rules to override immobilization. To do so you must need specific permission. Continuing to move after being immobilized is certainly counter intuitive to what immobilization says.
Page 124 paragraph 6 under arriving from reserves says that arriving from reserves using Deep Strike uses its own special rules not the "move fully onto the table from the table edge" part. This means that you cannot use paragraph 7 for a Deep Striking unit. The model would not be moved to a table edge, as it arrived via deep strike. I know you did not claim this, you used this point however to make the leap that instead we continue downward.
The problem with your leap from "Table Edge" to "moving downward" is that the edge of a battlefield must be the sides of the table. The edge cannot be anything else, otherwise the "edge" of the battlefield is never fully defined. Your table edge would be a space just above my models heads, a space that would clearly be occupied (think 3 dimensional height) on other parts of the game table by larger models.
How it breaks the game is we now have a hovering model. We cannot place the Land Raider (example unit) on the table as it has been immobilized from a DoG just above my unit. It may not mishap as the mishap is now movement, and an immobilized Land Raider misshaping is more specific than a misshaping Land Raider. You cannot move it downward as you cannot define the "edge" of the table to be anything but the 4 sides of the table. The rulebook clearly defines the 3 dimensional space above the board to actually be game space
The issue with ramming is how could you ram without a mishap? This would be a sidetrack to the discussion so I do not really want to get into it as it wouldn't serve much purpose.
No, that isn't a normal movement. Moving on from the board edge.is a normal movement. Moving as deep strike is not normal movement.
An allowance to tank shock from.reserve is not allowance to ALWAYS be able to tank shock. You are making a classic rules error if you think.otherwise..
Ds is not normal.movement, so you cannot tank shock. You cannot declare a number of inches - none at all - as you cannot fulfil the rules on measuring to do so.
So no, you cannot tankshock when deepstriking.
Finally please show allowance to end within 1" and not mishandling, bearing in mind your unit hasn't arrived, and hasn't moved. Page and para, or concede.
Lehnsherr wrote: As you have pointed out you can have a deep striking land raider so lets ignore the skimmer rule for now.
Simplifies things.
Lehnsherr wrote: You have said that deep striking must be movement. If you are immobilized and are then required to move your model as per the mishap table, how then are you able to move?
While this is the aspect I am least comfortable with it is one of the parts that I think has the most coverage in the RAW;
Pg 36 “ Vehicles, except for Walkers, count as having moved at Cruising Speed (even immobile vehicles).
Pg 125 “certain rare units are permanently immobile. If a unit like this cannot be deployed, or the player decides to keep it in reserve it enters the game by Deep Strike.”
While these rules are clearly intended to cover immobile-by design situations (ie; drop-pods) they have a clear line to cover other immobilized but unplaced vehicles.
Lehnsherr wrote: What I am saying is that if deployment via DS is considered movement, then resolving any of the mishap table results that require you to place the vehicle back in reserve must also be movement. However we now have a specific situation in which you are attempting to resolve the "mishap movement" while your vehicle is immobilized. Resolving a mishap is much less specific than resolving a mishap on an immobilized vehicle, when we have defined all DS to also be movement. Your vehicle would be unable to move and the game would once again break.
Of course the counter argument would be the mishap table is not movement but my question would be why? Why would mishap not be movement if DS is and they are all part of the same overall "move"?
I disagree that this is not covered.
Gravmyr's Mawloc answer is interesting, but I think Deep Strike and mishaps for immobilized vehicles are thoroughly covered within the Deep Strike rules themselves, as I explain above. Again, I see no reason that understanding that the rules are intended for use by units which are immobile-by-design creates a case to preclude their use on units which are immobile-from-play.
Lehnsherr wrote: As far as the skimmer rule goes, it requires you to slide the vehicle if the skimmer is "on top" or I am "under" the skimmer. In this situation underneath means we physically occupy the same space on the board and thus one of us must be moved. I am not under your skimmer I am below your skimmer. We do not occupy the same space in the game and neither of us would need to be moved. Remember, your base must be placed above my unit, not just the model. Once again we arrive in the situation in which you are immobilized above my unit with no way of continuing the game.
This seems like a distinction without a difference to me. If I'm reading this correctly (which I'll admit is a question) your expectation is that a skimmer's base be placed on a unit to benefit from the “slide off” exception. Is there any other situation in the rulebook which would more clearly generate this eventuality?
Grav, you are right in that many situations arise in which a situation becomes unclear on how to resolve. However in This situation we have 1 interpretation of a rule which breaks the game and one interpretation (DS is not movement and therefore you cannot TS from a DS) that does not break the game. When you arise in a situation like this you must use the interpretation that does not break the game.
As Grav says, I don't agree that this breaks the game. It requires resolution, but thus far nothing has existed entirely outside the rules as written. Honestly, it's going to be difficult to convince me that any of this breaks the game as the rules being cited (particularly the skimmer rules) are largely generalizations of rules which were presented as specifically applied to this case use for the Monolith in the previous edition of the codex and failed to 'break' the game. Note, I'm not saying that codex has any application, but I will use its rules as a jump-off to find justifications for applicable text in the new edition.
Just to further a previous post by Nosferatu in regards to filling all the requirements of a Tank Shock.
First turn the vehicle on the spot to face the direction you intend to move it... With 3 dimensions this could be rather difficult. You intend to move downward, not something specifically permitted by the rules of movement.
Downward, forward, to the table. The orientation requirement seems to be, by necessity, met by the arrival of the unit on the board.
Declare how many inches you are going to move up to your maximum speed... You addressed this earlier with your pre-measuring idea. However, where do we determine the point at which your vehicle starts from (above the board). Do you just get to pick? The space above the board is actual game space, so you cant really start anywhere in there. You can't be in the game space, while simultaneously not be in the game space, as reserves require you to do.
I covered that as well, any point your opponent agrees to. I'd suggest by the time you get 24” off the table you're probably safely out of most table's legitimate play zone. By the nature of Deep Strike the unit makes that movement within its maximum movement.
All of this being a byzantine way of justifying something which, by necessity of the RAW, works.
It is worth pointing out that things which are in reserve are, on some level, in the game, being legitimate targets for certain effects such as the monolith's eternity gate.
Lehnsherr wrote: Once aimed... move the tank straight forwards until it comes into contact with an enemy unit... I am not sure straight forward can be interpreted as downward. Furthermore, you must move straight forward, yet the ability to scatter on a deep strike means there is a possibility you do not move straight forward. Its not simply a "failed tank shock" we literally are not allowed to do this. The fact that this can happen is yet another big issue with the interpretation.
For some reason people keep arguing scatter as the incoming thing moving. Per the rules you use the subject of the deep strike as a marker. However, a more accurate simulation of the description presented for deep strike is clearly that you could use any item which appropriately defines the intended arrival location as a “target marker” while the incoming item itself remains elsewhere. You then adjust the target location via scatter, and the actual traversed path is between the incoming unit and its destination is the (possibly teleporter-drawn) line between wherever that model is and the targeting marker.
Lehnsherr wrote: Finally, if we allow a DS vehicle to perform a Tank Shock, then we have the rather large can of worms opened up about what happens when a Tank Shocking vehicle declares a Ram from Deep Strike. I haven't even considered what happens here, but thinking about it makes my head hurt.
I think focusing on the mishap is what is causing the disagreement here. If we leave out the mishap and focus on ability to be deployed this leads to less confrontation. If we assume that multiple types of movement rules can be used together then a unit on the ground must be moved out of the way of the TSing model as that is what TS states you do. If the unit is moved then the DSing model can then be deployed can it not?
The question becomes if DS is movement, which per the rules I can find it is, then at what point is it movement. I would say from the point you start the deployment, which means you can use what rules apply including TS. There is nothing actually in the rules that define any movement as "normal movement". I can find a number of places where it defines a type of movement but nothing they define as normal movement. With that in mind no model can ever TS which some argue that means the game breaks everyone goes home. The flip side is that all movement you would be using at that time is "normal movement" for that model. We have to assume that movement in the movement phase as defined for that model is it's "normal movement". Nothing in DS actually replaces the "normal movement" of the model, it is the "normal movement" for a model coming in from DS reserve.
That only works if you ignore a large part of the DS rules. Even if we go with that, why do you move the other models? You've not met the criteria for tank shock. Counting as having moved in the shooting phase =/= movement. So you've tank shocked 0" and not moved at a minimum of combat speed nor counted as having done so in the movement phase.
DS isn't normal movement, if you move normally you move as per your unit type. When you come in from a board edge normally or by outflank you move as per your unit type not true for DS.
Normal movement would be up to 6" for a monolith? Has the monolith moved 6" or declared that it is tank shocking 6"?
Also going to point out something which may be useful to others (I can't be bothered to engage fully in this because it's, IMO, silly).
Deep Strike Rules:
"First, place one model frorn the unit anywhere on the
table"
If you place a land raider on my models, is it ON the TABLE? No.
While this is the aspect I am least comfortable with it is one of the parts that I think has the most coverage in the RAW;
Pg 36 “ Vehicles, except for Walkers, count as having moved at Cruising Speed (even immobile vehicles).
Pg 125 “certain rare units are permanently immobile. If a unit like this cannot be deployed, or the player decides to keep it in reserve it enters the game by Deep Strike.”
While these rules are clearly intended to cover immobile-by design situations (ie; drop-pods) they have a clear line to cover other immobilized but unplaced vehicles.
That covers the deployment of a permanently immobile vehicle. The situation we have arising is a vehicle that is already deployed that becomes immobile. If we agree that DS is movement, then how do we resolve mishap 2-5? It requires your opponent to now place the model elsewhere, however we cannot move that model as it is immobile, and placing it elsewhere is movement. We are now back to the situation of a Land Raider hovering above my unit. Basically, even if I agree we have a clear line to cover other immobilized but unplaced vehicles (which is to me, neither clear, nor a line) we do not have an unplaced vehicle. The vehicle is placed, directly above my unit.
Again, I see no reason that understanding that the rules are intended for use by units which are immobile-by-design creates a case to preclude their use on units which are immobile-from-play.
Because it doesn't tell us so. You have made a rather large logical leap here to fill a gap created by your interpretation.
This seems like a distinction without a difference to me. If I'm reading this correctly (which I'll admit is a question) your expectation is that a skimmer's base be placed on a unit to benefit from the “slide off” exception. Is there any other situation in the rulebook which would more clearly generate this eventuality?
In order for a skimmer to slide off something it must be on that something. if you are immobilized due to the DoG you are not actually on my unit. You are above my unit and must stop just before touching me. You can't slide off me because you aren't on me.
As Grav says, I don't agree that this breaks the game. It requires resolution, but thus far nothing has existed entirely outside the rules as written. Honestly, it's going to be difficult to convince me that any of this breaks the game as the rules being cited (particularly the skimmer rules) are largely generalizations of rules which were presented as specifically applied to this case use for the Monolith in the previous edition of the codex and failed to 'break' the game. Note, I'm not saying that codex has any application, but I will use its rules as a jump-off to find justifications for applicable text in the new edition.
If we have a skimmer or a land raider that must now hover above my unit, is immobile, and has no way to move from there, what do we do? At this point we have to create rules or add addendums to existing rules to allow us to continue. At that point, you have to understand that the interpretation fails the test. If my interpretation requires no created rule, then it, by default, is correct.
I am not sure what you mean by the last part about the previous codex. I have it, and I know what the monolith was capable of, but we have a new codex, so using the old one, even for jump-offs, confuses me. Not only do we have a new codex we have a new edition of 40k. We are so far removed from that situation that to use it as a jump off point seems odd. If you could clarify that for me, it certainly might help me understand.
Downward, forward, to the table. The orientation requirement seems to be, by necessity, met by the arrival of the unit on the board.
I know the game is 3 dimensional, but I do not see anything about being able to move downward or upward. I see it for a specific situation for ruins, but nothing more. Are we allowed to move downward and upward outside of ruins? I am genuinely asking this question, not trying to be snarky.
I covered that as well, any point your opponent agrees to. I'd suggest by the time you get 24” off the table you're probably safely out of most table's legitimate play zone. By the nature of Deep Strike the unit makes that movement within its maximum movement.
What makes you say 24" is safely out of the play zone? The only defining edges we have are the 4 table edges. Literally we have a 3 dimensional game space that extends upward to infinity.
Furthermore, the tank shock rules say that you may not move further than your maximum move distance. Deep Strike says literally nothing about maximum move distance, or move distance of any kind for that matter. So you would have to start your monolith 12" above the table, then declare 12" downward to your intended target. 12" is not even beyond the height of a Stormraven. You would be starting your movement within the game space, while simultaneously being in reserve.
It is worth pointing out that things which are in reserve are, on some level, in the game, being legitimate targets for certain effects such as the monolith's eternity gate.
Yes agreed. Some things are part of the game. They may be used in reserve, targeted in reserve, however they do not occupy game space. Placing a monolith 12" above the table, claiming it is still in reserve, and then using the Deep Strike rules to then enter the game is beyond the scope of those abilities.
I think focusing on the mishap is what is causing the disagreement here. If we leave out the mishap and focus on ability to be deployed this leads to less confrontation
The very reason I am focusing on the mishap Grav is because it leads us to an absurd situation in which the game falls apart. If I choose to DoG I do not necessarily move my models out of the way. I stop you dead in your tracks on your way to the table.
If DS is movement, it must always be movement. It doesn't start as something else and then become movement. You would need to have something pretty darn specific to make that claim.
We have to assume that movement in the movement phase as defined for that model is it's "normal movement
Look at the Necron Codex at the Veil of Darkness. It says "Instead of moving normally you may use the veil to deep strike". The very existence of this sentence shows that deep strike is in no way normal movement for that unit.
How do all models in DS reserve enter play to be deployed? Deep Strike
Is there any other way they can come into play from DS Reserve other than DS? Other than a special rules for special models, no.
What is normal movement for a model coming in from DS Reserve then? DS.
The Veil is not Deep Strike, it is activating a piece of wargear that emulates Deep Strike. That activation is what is replacing their normal on table move. Can you DS from the table with a unit that has the DS special rule? No you must start in reserve for DS to be used normally. Getting to the table, from DS Reserve, would normally then be done via DS.
If DS is movement, which I think everyone agrees it is, you are right it's movement from beginning to end. As such at no point does DS state that the model counts as not moving therefor all movement rules apply.
The only catch anyone has found, in the rules themselves, is declaring the distance. It isn't even a real catch as silentone2k has put forth you and your opponent have to come to an agreement. The same can be said of the results of DoG, it's not that it is against the rules just that it is not covered.
I agree that movement is supposed to happen on the horizontal axis but is there anything in the rules that states that it is? Without it there is no actual RAW distinction and using the same premise some are using for stopping infantry in mid-air using WMS would work for this as well....
Still not arguing for this just trying to find a concrete non-taste inspired reason it should be disallowed.
Gravmyr wrote: I agree that movement is supposed to happen on the horizontal axis but is there anything in the rules that states that it is? Without it there is no actual RAW distinction and using the same premise some are using for stopping infantry in mid-air using WMS would work for this as well....
Still not arguing for this just trying to find a concrete non-taste inspired reason it should be disallowed.
The only thing is that it does clarify "normal" movement. Now I ask, what is normal movement. Judging by how most things move in 40k I can only assume what normal movement is, but that's good enough for me as a TO.
The only catch anyone has found, in the rules themselves, is declaring the distance. It isn't even a real catch as silentone2k has put forth you and your opponent have to come to an agreement. The same can be said of the results of DoG, it's not that it is against the rules just that it is not covered.
I think you are vastly underestimating how much of a problem this is. Its not about coming to an agreement its the fact that its impossible to declare a distance within the rules framework if you are arriving via DS. The reason they aren't covered is precisely because they are not allowed by the rules. Its a permissive rule set, so if you do not have permission to do it, then it is against the rules.
As I pointed out in the previous post, a Tank Shocking model may not move further than its maximum distance. Deep strike does not say it increases your movement, or that it gives you an infinite maximum movement. You are limited by your maximum movement, so on a Land Raider that's 12 inches. So to complete a TS while DSing with a Land Raider would require you to take your Land Raider, start it 12 inches above the battlefield, declare your tank shock downward, then complete the tank shock. The problem with this is that by placing it 12 inches above the battlefield you have actually placed it in the game space. There are rules that allow you to tank shock coming on from reserves, but in this case you aren't coming on from reserves, you have literally placed your model in the game, and then declared a tank shock from reserves.
That's also the problem with the DoG. You state that you and your opponent need to come to an agreement to fix a problem. That problem is only created if we take the interpretation of allowing a TS during a Deep Strike. If we use the interpretation that you are not allowed to TS while DSing then we do not have a problem with the rules. Given the 2, we must take the interpretation that does not break the rules.
whereas this movement for DS is done on a purely Vertical Axis
The thing is, Deep Strike isn't even vertical axis movement. We assume it is because we are using the fluff (arriving from outside the battlefield onto the battlefield) but within the rules its not actually vertical movement. There is literally no description in the rulebook on how to perform the "move" part of a deep strike. You simply place a model and the rest arrive. In fact the rules for deep striking within a ruins clearly break the logical flow of vertical movement. If you have a 4 story ruin your models arrive at the bottom floor of the ruin. Do they crash through all 3 other sections of the ruin to complete their move?
The other problem being that if we hold our models in reserve and then deep strike them onto the table, as movement, our models are actually in the game without being in the game as we must hold them above the battlefield (a space that is considered game space, not reserves) and then drop them into game space.
Lehnsherr wrote: The problem with this is that by placing it 12 inches above the battlefield you have actually placed it in the game space. There are rules that allow you to tank shock coming on from reserves, but in this case you aren't coming on from reserves, you have literally placed your model in the game, and then declared a tank shock from reserves.
See now that is an argument based on rules, not on the fact that rules are not clear, that I can agree with.
Okay, I skipped over a bunch of this thread, so I apologise if this has been covered.
1-Deepstriking "counts as having moved" in order for it to count as having moved, it would need to be something other than moving.
2-Tank shocking replaces normal movement, not just any movement, but specifically normal movement. I don't think your argument shows that deepstrike=normal movement.
3-Tank shock replaces normal movement. If you can argue that DS=normal movement, then you would replace the deepstrike with a tank shock. You would not be able to combine them as one clearly replaces the other. In this case the deepstrike would not occur as it was replaced. As it must, as declared during deployment, arrive by deepstrike, I don't think you would even have the option of moving on from a table edge. The tank shock rules do not allow you to place it like the deepstrike rules do, so you would be stuck in reserves.
Those are the things I picked up on looking into this.
Automatically Appended Next Post: Also, the way I'm reading it:
Counts as having moved is a past tense statement, it doesn't count as having moved until after the placement occurs. (Although raw, it only counts as having moved in the shooting phase). The tank shock would need to occur as the model was being placed. That doesn't seem to match up together at all.
The tankshocking from reserves section gives permission to tank shock as you move onto the board. The model does not even count as having moved until after placement.
I haven't checked for sure, but:
Doesn't deepstrike state that you place the model on the board, where normal reserves and outflanking actually say moving on to the board? If so, defining that placement as moving onto the board, would defining it in a way the rulebook doesn't really support.
Im probably past just my two cents, but that sentiment remains
Gravmyr - normal movement would.be the basic movement listed at the start of the movement section, by definition. If you would move according to those rules you may tank shock. DS does not follow those rules.
you have hand waved away the fact you cannot comply with ANY of the rules for tank shock. None of them. So you cannot tank shock.
FInally until the mishap situation is resolved the model has not arrived; you are yet to.deploy
Lastly, and this was proven dozens of times, scatter is NOT movement. Only after you have arrived do you count as having moved.
Not possible. In this situation, the Monolith is in the Deep Strike Reserves, not the normal reserves and Tank Shocking does not allow you to do so from Deep Strike Reserves; only the regular Reserves.
Lastly, to entertain the notion. Doing this is worthless. The Monolith can only move six inches anyways.
Why is it that people read what they want when people make posts? I have to assume that you can't be bothered to actually read what is written and therefor will be putting people on the ignore list for this from now on, starting with you nos. It seems that you missed the point in several threads by several people that have stated that the entire DS procedure, including but not limited to the scatter, is movement. Your continued insistence that people are saying that only the scatter is movement is silly and straw manning all discussions of this topic.
If the rules call that normal movement can anyone list me a page, in the movement section, that refers to that as normal movement. This is the largest crux of the argument against it but not a single person has been able to come up with page reference. If we are going by the assumption that the movement section is normal movement then any vehicle that has special rules and does not have to follow "normal movement" rules can never TS.
As for deployment from reserve, I posted above that is about the only actual game rule TS-DSing would break and a reason I can accept.
Edit: As an aside are you in reserve if you are in DS Reserve? If you are not then where is it's separate rules for coming into play other than deployment, such as what you need to roll. I guess you can't if it is a completely separate thing that does not adhere to the rules for reserves.
Why is the scatter movement? If it's not called a duck and doesn't count as a duck (RAW), why do you say it's a duck? You are not deployed until you are deployed otherwise you're still in reserves, that is why your opponent can deploy your unit when you mishap.
The movement rules are listed as per the unit type in the reference section. That is how those unit types move normally or their "normal movement".
The issue isn't being in reserve, it's being deployed using DS that is the issue. Well, DS has many divergences from normal reserves, they are why it is treated differently.
The scatter is movement because DS is movement and the scatter is part of DS.
Which as I stated is a fine assumption, but if a model has special rules that change how their movement is done then it is not a "normal movement" for their unit type and can therefor never TS. Normal movement therefor has to be decided on a model by model basis or you have to accept that movement changes dependent on the situation.
DS Reserve has one divergence from normal reserve, deployment. Being set aside at initial deployment, informing your opponent they are in reserve, the roll to bring them in are all the same. If DS Reserve does not use any part of the standard reserve rules it has to be spelled out and the only differences in the BRB is what it is "sometimes" called and how you deploy them.
DS is not movement, you have yet to show how it is movement especially before the model is deployed. It is counted as movement in the shooting phase but that is not the same thing. It is deployment and some forms of deployment include movement but not all. Initial deployment doesn't require movement for example. That to deploy models from reserve normally or by outflank requires movement is not in question, however once those units arrive onto the board they are moving from the table edge and are subject to the normal restrictions of movement and the 1" rule unless tank shocking. The DS unit isn't on the board or subject to normal movement restrictions( those listed in the movement chapter such as terrain etc before you even demand I define "normal movement restrictions") it is still subject to its own DS restrictions until it has been deployed successfully.
If I DS and mishap and come in turn 3, have I moved in turn 2? You are saying yes to this question. Which cannot be true, as to have moved you need to be on the board and to be on the board you must be deployed but if you've deployed you wouldn't have mishapped.
Gravmyr wrote:The scatter is movement because DS is movement and the scatter is part of DS.
Then no model can ever Mishap, ever. Because if, as you state with NO RULES whatsoever, despite being sked to provide them and failing to do so, at any point, it is movement you may not move within 1" of an enemy, or on top of a friendly.
Oh wait. It isnt movement.
Gravmyr wrote:Which as I stated is a fine assumption, but if a model has special rules that change how their movement is done then it is not a "normal movement" for their unit type and can therefor never TS. Normal movement therefor has to be decided on a model by model basis or you have to accept that movement changes dependent on the situation.
The rulebook defines "normal" movement, by defining basic movement. DS is not normal movement. Done.
Gravmyr wrote:DS Reserve has one divergence from normal reserve, deployment. Being set aside at initial deployment, informing your opponent they are in reserve, the roll to bring them in are all the same. If DS Reserve does not use any part of the standard reserve rules it has to be spelled out and the only differences in the BRB is what it is "sometimes" called and how you deploy them.
It isnt a normal move, which is all that matters.
However given you have decided that being asked to provide some semblance of rules to support your position means you should ignore me, this is only for the benefit of others who think your position has any merit. It doesnt.
OK after a night with a migraine and a dim room with a book I have to concede that DS is not movement. The part of the process which is movement is the actual deployment. Let me make your argument for you. Ignore the part about the shooting phase as what happens in the movement is the actual proof.
BRBpg 36 "In the Movement phase during which they arrive, deep striking units may not move any further,"...
There are two parts to this that make the argument, first they have to arrive to count as having moved secondly they cannot move further. The further part is what actually identifies that they have moved but I glossed over the when they arrive. The shooting part about counting as having moved would be worded as " obviously count as if having moved" if they wanted to contradict the previous statement and not make it movement. So it is the deployment itself that is the movement part of the DS. This is a more concrete argument, maybe the one you were trying to make, without actually pointing what you felt was what made it so. If the deployment was not movement then you would not be subject to terrain at all which also goes to prove that the deployment is movement.
As far as normal movement is concerned how you define normal is always relative. The use of normal doesn't actually clarify anything, as what I expect from a monolith in DS reserve is a DS. If you point to only the move in the movement phase again this can cause exclusions if models have unique ways of moving. Tank Ork tanks with a RPJ, a normal move for a tank is up to 12" but with a RPJ it's 13". This is not normal using the regular vehicle movement rules yet it can make use of the extra 1" from RPJ. Monoliths have a restriction to 6" move so that is not a normal move but yet can tank shock.
EDIT: @Gravmyr: Okay I am not sure whether your last post was arguing for or against DS=movement or DS allows tankshock. If you really are saying you are against it, then I am misunderstanding what you wrote, and as such you should ignore this post. If you are arguing that DS=movement, then please, continue reading.
Gravmyr wrote: The further part is what actually identifies that they have moved
No it does not. It could mean that. It could also mean something else. What would absolutely mean that is if it said something like, "can not continue to move" but that is not what is written. Can not move further does not say the unit has moved and may not continue, it says that it can not move from the spot it is in now. Further is one of those ambiguous words with multiple meanings most of which could be taken either way. To say "It means X" would not be provable when it could just as equally mean "Y."
Gravmyr wrote: The shooting part about counting as having moved would be worded as " obviously count as if having moved" if they wanted to contradict the previous statement and not make it movement. So it is the deployment itself that is the movement part of the DS.
Uhm... nothing you quoted actually means that. If something has to be flagged as counting as movement, then it has to be something other than movement to begin with, or it wouldn't "count as," it simply would "be." It doeasn't say that though. The word obviously, is... well... obviously there because the author thought what came after it was obvious, and using that word does not mean anything else.
Gravmyr wrote: This is a more concrete argument, maybe the one you were trying to make, without actually pointing what you felt was what made it so. If the deployment was not movement then you would not be subject to terrain at all which also goes to prove that the deployment is movement.
Uhm.. this is another assumption not supported by anything raw. DS is effected by terrain because the DS rules say it is. You know what else is effected by terrain, but isn't movement? Shooting attacks, initial deployment, cover saves, line of sight, psychic powers, mysterious terrain rolls, etc. If being effected by terrain equated to being movement then all of those things are movement.
Gravmyr wrote: As far as normal movement is concerned how you define normal is always relative. The use of normal doesn't actually clarify anything, as what I expect from a monolith in DS reserve is a DS. If you point to only the move in the movement phase again this can cause exclusions if models have unique ways of moving. Tank Ork tanks with a RPJ, a normal move for a tank is up to 12" but with a RPJ it's 13". This is not normal using the regular vehicle movement rules yet it can make use of the extra 1" from RPJ. Monoliths have a restriction to 6" move so that is not a normal move but yet can tank shock.
Yes normal movement is relative, but it is also never deep strike. If deep strike was normal movement, the monolith would be pretty awesome as it teleports around the battle every turn... in fact a lot of units would suddenly start teleporting around the battle every turn lol. My gosh tau would be completely broken. Really funny stuff would occur, like trying to figure out the effect of the monoliths 6" restricted deepstrike... would it only be able to move 6 inches closer to the board from your reserve pile each turn? ...Or would it only scatter six inches? ...Or would it only be able to deepstrike six inches away from it's current position each turn? And since you mention RPJ, would an orc vehicle that deepstrikes and has an RPJ be able to move that one extra inch after it's position was determined?
The following is my personal viewpoint, and I have run across several people here on the forums who seem to believe pretty much the opposite, so take it as you will:
You have made a lot of assumptions and inferences, that could be true, only if you read things a certain way. But assumptions and inferences are not raw. RAW does not actually say what you say it does because your inferences are not written in the book. It is not rules as written unless it is... well... written in the book. So no, RAW is not that DS is movement, much less normal movement, and RAW is not that tank shocks can be preformed from DS, because it is not written in the book. If you have to apply a dozen (I didn't actually count them and this number is made up) inferences into it, then it is not raw (I'm sure there are some exceptions out there, but not this one). You could, with the aid of some rather large leaps of logic, interpretraw to mean that, but once you hit the area of how you interpret things you are leaving raw and hitting rai.
Cool idea probably doable in fun game. However there would be a huge mess to clean up when our nerd heads explode due to the tangled rules quandary it creates.
I've been against it for a while, I was just asking for a rule based explanation. The largest group against it would only say that DS isn't movement, without actually using rules quotes. Just repeating that it isn't and ignoring the fact that it can't be obvious if that is the first time it is mentioned you count as having moved and that you have to have moved to move further or have a point of reference to be measuring from.
For further to mean anything but the model having moved it would have to give you a point of reference, like "I'm moving further away from the city." If it meant they could not move wouldn't it have been easier to have said that then adding further?
Do you count as having moved if you have moved? Isn't it obvious that you count as having moved if you have moved? How would it be considered obvious if that is the first time that you are being informed you count as having moved?
DS does not state it is affected by terrain. The only mention of terrain is that they treat difficult as dangerous and cannot deploy in impassable terrain. If you are simply deployed in Dangerous terrain in the beginning of the game do you take a Dangerous Terrain test? Then if you are not moving then you would not take one when you deep strike. The list you give is dependent on too many factors to claim they are affected by terrain. The mysterious terrain rolls is not affected by the terrain, it is caused by it. Unless it is in a particular type of terrain it does not affect any psychic powers (is there any terrain that affects psychic powers?)
DS is normal movement for a unit being deployed from Deep Strike reserve. Once it is on the table it would no longer be the normal move. There is no start point to measure from so the heavy would not affect it (as an aside normal move or not Heavy allows only movement up to Combat Speed). As I have already stated only the actual deployment is movement, so how would Heavy affect scatter? RPJ is not a factor either as it cannot move further.
I have revised my position and yet I find you referencing either part of my position that does not exist any longer or never existed. As you point out we are looking at this RAW and there is no RAW normal movement, which if we go by only the movement presented in the beginning of the vehicle section then anything that alters that movement must make it impossible to Tank Shock. I'm down to a simple assumption and that is that normal means one of the possible definitions presented by oxford English dictionary. Expected, typical, usual, and conforming to a standard are the ones I can find and DS qualifies as all of these for a model in DS reserve. That's the problem with ambiguous writing and not defined terms, two people can easily look at something and see something different.
You don't have normal movement defined in the rules as you don't need to. You define movement and anything that is different to that is not normal movement.
For further to mean anything but the model having moved it would have to give you a point of reference, like "I'm moving further away from the city." If it meant they could not move wouldn't it have been easier to have said that then adding further?
From dictionary.com, the definitions of the word could be used in that sentence and still come out an approximately even mix of meaning that it would have moved prior and not meaning that (I'm not saying that the other meanings would mean that it didn't move, just that the other meanings would not indicate it either way.) As to it being easier to state it without the word further, I agree, either way for or against it would have made it far less ambiguous to either leave it out or use a more deffinite word. GW applies this same problem to many many many of thier rules, and simular situations arise in, well most of the threads on this forum.
Gravmyr wrote: Do you count as having moved if you have moved? Isn't it obvious that you count as having moved if you have moved? How would it be considered obvious if that is the first time that you are being informed you count as having moved?
Again that is an interpretation. The reason the author thought it was obvious is not included, and you could make one of dozens of reasonable explanations for it. Unless you are the author, or can legally speak for him, trying to claim you know why they thought it was obvious is really just something you decided. Yes it could be correct, but it is not raw, because it is not something anyone actually knows to be solid fact (except maybe the author)
Gravmyr wrote: DS does not state it is affected by terrain. The only mention of terrain is that they treat difficult as dangerous and cannot deploy in impassable terrain.
How can you say DS does not state it is effected by terrain and in the very next sentence say that it states they treat difficult terrain as dangerous terrain??? Is dangerous terrain now not terrain? DS certainly states that it is affected by it.
Gravmyr wrote: If you are simply deployed in Dangerous terrain in the beginning of the game do you take a Dangerous Terrain test? Then if you are not moving then you would not take one when you deep strike.
pg 90n brb, "each model must take a dangerous terrain test when it enters, leaves, or moves within dangerous terrain." Note how they differentiate between enters, leaves, and moves. Seems the rules treat those three things as different enough to be stated separately. Here is a senario for you illistrating this. Monolith deepstrikes into dangerous terrain, entering it, then obyron uses his ghostwalk mantle to deepstrike over to his boss, leaving the dangerous terrain. The following turn a squad of enemy scarabs move through the dangerous terrain to reach the monolith and attack it. In all three situations dangerous terrain tests need to be made, but one was entering, one was leaving, and only one was movement.
Gravmyr wrote: The list you give is dependent on too many factors to claim they are affected by terrain. The mysterious terrain rolls is not affected by the terrain, it is caused by it. Unless it is in a particular type of terrain it does not affect any psychic powers (is there any terrain that affects psychic powers?)
Everything on that list is effected by terrain in some way. Mysterious terrain rolls (i specified the rolls part) are effected by what type of terrain it is, IE: forests, rivers, artefact. Psychic powers are effected by LOS requirements, and some by cover saves, both things that terrain effects heavily.
Gravmyr wrote: DS is normal movement for a unit being deployed from Deep Strike reserve. Once it is on the table it would no longer be the normal move.
This would be a logical explanation if you could prove that DS is movement, but I'm pretty sure that isn't going to happen (more likely the argument will go round and round forever or until a faq settles it) But really, in a rules sense, would you say that a mode of travel usable only when certain factors align (being in DS reserves, being allowed to use DS in that mission, not mishapping), and only once per game to be the model's normal movement. Also not the difference between a model's normal movement and the action it would normally take at a certain time. If you accept the premise that whatever it would normally do at any given time is it's normal movement, you could then argue that any logical choice of (movement) action would be it's normal movement. In this case tank shock itself becomes normal movement as long as you have a valid tank shock target, as that would be the logical, normal thing to do. Then you could deal with the mess that would be the tank shock (as normal movement) replacing itself. Que nerd head explosion.
Gravmyr wrote: As you point out we are looking at this RAW and there is no RAW normal movement
My entire argument is that this argument is not really raw anyway, because it is based on inferences of what is written rather than what is actually written.
Except you are using an American dictionary instead of an English one. Have a look at the Oxford English dictionary. There are 4 definitions, all of which would point to needing a reference point or to have previously moved.
Secondly you are only looking at the use of the word not the context contained within the definition.
1. Prior movement.
2. Because move is referenced would also indicate movement
3. Does not apply as it is used in reference to move not to join a sentence.
4. Prior movement
5. Because move is referenced would also indicate movement.
6. Prior Movement
7. Does not apply.
I assume you avoid answering because this would actually weaken your case. Show me RAW what else is could be referring to if they did not mean for the Deployment to be movement.
DS lists 2 types of terrain and does not say that a model is affected by Dangerous just that they treat difficult as dangerous. This implies they are affected by it but does not say it must take the dangerous terrain test.
At deployment do you take dangerous terrain tests against units that are deploying in dangerous terrain? If the answer is no then you would not take one for DS as you are deploying not moving into it.
LOS requirement are not affected by terrain they are affected by LoS. It's like saying they are affected by tanks. Cover saves are affected by terrain which actually has nothing to do with psychic powers just the save the model that takes a wound is granted.
Gravmyr wrote: Except you are using an American dictionary instead of an English one. Have a look at the Oxford English dictionary. There are 4 definitions, all of which would point to needing a reference point or to have previously moved.
It never even occurred to me that there would be a difference, you learn something every day. Thanks!
Gravmyr wrote: Show me RAW what else is could be referring to if they did not mean for the Deployment to be movement.
I'll repeat this for you: My entire argument is that this discussion is not raw, but rai. That should answer that for you. When you ask what did they mean, if it is not perfectly clear, you are getting into rai, because you are discussing what the author intended it to mean. I am neither for or against it being played either way. I simply do not think RAW covers it at all, which is what the OP was arguing. The OP stated that he did not think it was RAI, nor HIWPI, but that he thought it was RAW, and that is what I am arguing against.
Gravmyr wrote: Secondly you are only looking at the use of the word not the context contained within the definition.
Some of those definitions would not require prior movement, but only requires the point of reference of it's current location.
Still trying to figure out where the specific permission to break the DS rules are written...I mean since an exception to the DS rules for placement within 1" of an enemy model would have to be granted to even attempt this. Barring that specific exception, the rest of the argument is moot.
Gravmyr wrote: And the normal movement of a model in DS reserve is what?
As Insaniak said - it doesnt have one, when it DS. The phrase is "instead of moving normally"
Find DS in the Movement section. Page and paragraph showing it is defined in the Movement section as usuall movement. It isnt? Then it is not "normal" movement.
There is , RAW, no way to avoid that mishap just by being a skimmer. There is, RAW, no way to avoid mishap by trying to Tank Shock, as you cannot Tank Shock while deepstriking (you cannot fulfil ANY of the requirements)
If Deep Striking is movement as I think I have shown that the deployment is, is that not what is normal for a unit in DS Reserve?
How about my assertion concerning changes to a unit's movement. If it changes how the movement in the movement phase happens, is it still a normal move or is it no longer normal? How do we know that we can use one set of rules which changes movement but not another and still call it normal?
Gravmyr wrote: If Deep Striking is movement as I think I have shown that the deployment is, is that not what is normal for a unit in DS Reserve?
Until we enter an edition where deep striking its the primary movement mode used in the game, that won't make it normal movement.
How about my assertion concerning changes to a unit's movement. If it changes how the movement in the movement phase happens, is it still a normal move or is it no longer normal? How do we know that we can use one set of rules which changes movement but not another and still call it normal?
I can't answer that, because I have no idea what you're talking about.
Gravmyr wrote: If Deep Striking is movement as I think I have shown that the deployment is, is that not what is normal for a unit in DS Reserve?
Is DS the normal movement mode for any unit? No? Then no, it is not normal movement, even for a unit in DS reserve. It is very definitely ABnormal movement. If you disagree you are stating all units can make use of it, which is false.
Gravmyr wrote: If Deep Striking is movement as I think I have shown that the deployment is, is that not what is normal for a unit in DS Reserve?
Is DS the normal movement mode for any unit? No? Then no, it is not normal movement, even for a unit in DS reserve. It is very definitely ABnormal movement. If you disagree you are stating all units can make use of it, which is false.
This is a logical fallacy. Not all units can move 12" normally, however it is a normal movement for Jump units.
I see nothing preventing that if it could somehow return to reserves. Why would the lack of (innate) ability to return to reserves preclude using DS again should it arrive there?
silentone2k wrote: I see nothing preventing that if it could somehow return to reserves. Why would the lack of (innate) ability to return to reserves preclude using DS again should it arrive there?
DS is from reserves, to go into ongoing reserves and enter by DS requires specific premission a la the gate of infinity. Even then it is still not normal movement for that psyker.
Tankshock replaces normal movement? right, so it replaces all movement restrictions with a new set, which basically boils down to point, move, hit. So if it replaces the 'normal movement' it would therefore overwrite the DS rules of place? So if you can't place......
Can someone please define how a piece enters play (as in the method of transport), because as someone pointed out, if I immobilise a TS unit, where does it stop? Droppod would hover in the air, Monolith, which teleports would be 1" on the other side of the teleport. Does anything dig? so thats 1" below the board. The reason I ask, because if it's not defined then you can't base RAW off of it, it's immediately RAI.
Essentially there is no way to claim DS is normal movement, no way to fulfil TS requirements EVEN IF you decide to claim it is normal movement, and that still doesnt alter that you dont get to "arrive" until after you mishap, meaning you haven tTS
its about the weakest possible argument - just a lot of handwving and hope
, or 
